-
Pick Obama’s Brain
May 16, 2013 | 61 comments
-
Remembering Herb Romerstein
May 10, 2013 | 5 comments
-
Obama’s Planned Parenthood Love Fest
April 29, 2013 | 69 comments
-
Happy Earth Day… and Lenin Day
April 22, 2013 | 33 comments
-
Bill Casey’s Centennial
April 5, 2013 | 69 comments
Political Hay
The End of the Reagan Era?
Yes and no, mainly because of the self-contradictory nature of the American voter.
Barack Obama’s re-christening has arrived. It commenced with a small private ceremony January 20, Sunday — God’s day. The actual festivities, with the inaugural address and the grandstand and mass liberal adulation and veneration, occur Monday, January 21. For those angry liberals who urged Obama to banish the Almighty from the inaugural, they can take solace in the public ceremony (traditionally held on January 20) not occurring on the Christian holy day.
Alas, with Obama’s re-coronation, liberals are glorying in an altogether new epoch, one of supreme significance to their ideological resurgence: the end of the Reagan era. They’ve desired it for decades, and you can feel it, see it, smell it at their websites and blogs. One recent book carries the breathless title, Barack Obama’s America: How New Conceptions of Race, Family, and Religion Ended the Reagan Era.
Sadly, I must admit, as a Reagan scholar and admirer, that they are largely correct. Obama’s reelection does, to a notable degree, end the Reagan era. We are now in the snares of a despairing period of left-wing ascendance, marked by gay marriage, forced taxpayer funding of abortion, an exploding government class, and, generally big government. As to the latter, Ronald Reagan had declared in his first inaugural: “government is not the solution … government is the problem.” The first Democrat to follow Reagan, Bill Clinton, had similarly stated “the era of big government is over.” Clinton’s affirmation was also affirmation of the continuation of the Reagan era.
And then came Barack Obama. Just days after his 2009 inauguration, Obama smashed the Reagan mantle, proclaiming: “the federal government is the only entity left with the resources to jolt our economy back into life. It is only government that can break the vicious cycle where lost jobs lead to people spending less money which leads to even more layoffs.”
Yes, “only government.” Obama had repudiated Reagan, and the electorate would again reward him four years later. What Obama called for 2009 seems to be the new American spirit in 2013.
But is it? Well, the answer is complicated.
For one, Barack Obama is indeed in the process of undoing the Reagan era. He has done so courtesy of a hopelessly oblivious American public, one that exhibits mindlessly schizophrenic voting behavior. Let history record a positively confounding reality that will baffle future historians (if they dig deep enough): The Obama era supplanted the Reagan era thanks to a self-contradicting voting public, one that adores Reagan, refers to him in opinion polls as the greatest of our presidents, and that overwhelming describes itself as conservative rather than liberal. All unbelievable, yes, but true. It is bizarre.
Consider the painful facts:
For a long time now, starting with the Reagan presidency, Americans have called themselves “conservative” rather than “liberal” by margins of roughly two-to-one. Generally, self-identified liberals have hovered around the 20% level, while conservatives have ranged in the upper-30%, sometimes above 40%. In 2000, the year George W. Bush was elected president, 18% of Americans said they were liberal vs. 36% who said they were conservative.
Surely this must have changed in 2008, with the election of Obama? After all, before he was elected president, Senator Barack Obama was ranked the most liberal member of a very liberal U.S. Senate by the respected, non-partisan National Journal, which is famous for its rankings of members of Congress. Obama was literally to the left of Barbara Boxer and Ted Kennedy. In short, then, the decisive majority of Americans that elected Obama president in 2008 must have been an overwhelmingly liberal lot?
That’s where the confusion sets in. No, it wasn’t a liberal lot.
Despite Obama winning the presidency by 54 to 46%, 21% of Americans who voted in the 2008 election said they were liberal vs. 38% who said they were conservative.
If that seems contradictory for a nation that voted for a man from the far left as president… well, it is. But it gets worse. Consider the findings of other surveys done shortly after Obama’s 2008 election:
A major Gallup poll conducted from January to May 2009, at the height of “Obama mania,” including Obama’s massive inaugural ceremony, found more self-described conservatives than liberals not only by a margin of 40% to 21% but in all 50 states. That’s correct, all 50 states, from California to Massachusetts. And that electorate chose Obama.
It also chose Reagan. During that same period, a remarkable nationwide survey was done by Clarus Research Group, which asked American voters which president should be the model for Barack Obama in shaping his presidency. One would expect Americans to pick a liberal president — since, of course, Obama is a leftist. Perhaps FDR, LBJ, Jimmy Carter. Instead, the top choice was America’s most conservative president: Ronald Reagan.
About the Author
Paul Kengor is professor of political science and executive director of The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College. He is author of the new book The Communist: Frank Marshall Davis, The Untold Story of Barack Obama’s Mentor. His other books include The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism and Dupes: How America’s Adversaries Have Manipulated Progressives for a Century.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (283) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Paul Kengor
More Articles From Political Hay
http://spectator.org/archives/2013/01/21/the-end-of-the-reagan-era
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 1.21.13 @ 6:35AM
The article presumes Obama is perceived as a liberal.
Obama, wisely or not, kept almost all of the Bush policies in place including the Bush tax policies.
Four years later, 98.5 % of the public still benefits from the Bush tax policies. Guantanamo remains open and Obama has deported more illegal aliens than any other President.
Take out Obamacare and you have a conservative administration who lost billions with bets in the green industry. That's their biggest sin and most people don't care about that.
Back to Obamacare. It started as a conservative idea. Now it's gone awry, and whose fault is that?
Overall, I don't believe the public perceives Obama as an out and out liberal. Look at Reagan. He raised taxes 11 times.
So far, Obama raised taxes on 1.5% of the population that is rich.
Watch what happens though when the Obamacare taxes kick in for everyone. That's where his reputation will start to dissolve and rather quickly.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 1.21.13 @ 8:19AM
Here's a question.
There's a chart at the Post today that tracks the popularity of two term Presidents. Go look at it.
George W. Bush was twice as popular as any of the other three, including Reagan, Clinton and Obama.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....index.html
GobBluthe| 1.21.13 @ 8:51AM
Forgot obamacare when making your case for Obamas alleged conservatism. Not to mention the taxes obamacare imposes.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 1.21.13 @ 9:30AM
Go back and read again. I covered it and as complete as you can in 25 words or less allowed.
GobBluthe| 1.21.13 @ 1:22PM
Your point is correct. We'll see what happens to the Obama coalition when it finally has to pay for the govt it wants. Right now we're in a situation where the takers can take and Ben Bernanke covers the difference with QE.
R Martin| 1.21.13 @ 7:22AM
“What will it take to resurrect the Reagan era? It will take the right Republican presidential candidate and the right campaign, and Republicans unifying and rallying behind the candidate — and not joining the New York Times and liberal smear-artists in attacking and demonizing our guy…” More…
R Martin| 1.21.13 @ 7:23AM
That’s a recitation of the bleedin obvious. I’m not sure such a Republican exists and I’m pretty sure such a Republican Party does not exist. Republicans are just as fickle as the general population. At various times Republican were enthusiastic about the following as possible presidential material: Arianna Huffington, Colin Powell, Chris Christie, Arnold Schwarzenegger, not to mention the candidates they actually nominated.
If Reganism lives on, it needs to see the doctor quickly.
Von Mises Jr| 1.21.13 @ 10:10AM
You touch on an important point, R Martin. The GOP is not conservative and the choice is not between liberal and conservatives in DC, it is between totalitarians and statist. King George II gave us the Patriot Act, McCain-Feingold, Medicare Part D and increased spending from $1.8T to $2.93T in eight years. King George II was the anti-Reagan; just as his Agenda21 Statist father King George I. King Barrack the Benevolent does not look so bad when the alternative to chipped beef is spam.
But Mr. Kengor has a point. In the Northeast, people who claim to be conservatives spike their public employee pension plans and retire at 55. To some degree, Walter E. Williams is correct that once theft becomes legal, it pays to steal.
But in comparison to former Presidents, Obama is no Reagan. The dilemma he creates is the same that Lincoln died to solve: slavery. But Obama is on the wrong side of history and the country has turned inside out. Now it is the North that wants a caste system and slavery to the State, while the South is fighting for class mobility and liberty.
Drunken Sailor| 1.21.13 @ 10:21AM
Martin,
Agreed. It should have read.
"It will take the right Conservative presidential candidate and the right campaign, and Conservatives unifying and rallying behind the candidate"
Then again America is sadly lacking in Critical Thinking skills (as intended) so why are we surprised that a con artist was elected twice?
Gary B| 1.21.13 @ 7:37AM
Joe the Plumber seems like a good choice. If the job description is to do the right thing, a million Americans qualify.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 11:55AM
30 years from now, perhaps ... but for the next 30 years, it sucks to be you.
CJW| 1.21.13 @ 12:19PM
Purpie the Village Idiot,
Just when I thought you could not get any more stupid yous say:
"Only an all powerful government can stop women from exercising their God-given choice."
So now God has give women the choice to kill an unborn child? When did God do this? Maybe your are confusing God with the Supreme Court
Seek| 1.21.13 @ 1:43PM
It will never happen. The electorate is far more nonwhite than it was in 1980 and 1984. And nonwhites will never vote Republican, no matter how much we "reach out." We've been reaching out to blacks in particular since Nixon -- to no avail.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 4:23PM
'Cause the reach-out sucks... keep trying the same old, same old ... and you get - the same old, same old. LOL
Petronius| 1.21.13 @ 4:59PM
It will also require enough competent adults to elect him. We will not see that happen in our lifetimes.
Cobalt| 1.21.13 @ 7:25AM
Unlike Obama, Ronald Reagan loved and respected the United States of America.
We have reached the tipping point, and the numbers now favor Obama and his fellow travelers.
"A Conspiracy so Immense"
By Matthew Continetti
http://freebeacon.com/a-conspiracy-so-immense/
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 4:24PM
And yet, both Presidents signed treaties to limit nuclear weapons.
Ruh-Roh, that means Barack Obama is Ronald Reagan's protege ... wow.
Gary B| 1.21.13 @ 7:32AM
"Barack Obama is indeed in the process of undoing the Reagan era."
It goes a lot further than that. Actually, the son of a bitch is undoing the whole idea of America. He's a classic Marxist on a destructive quest and half of America knows it.
GobBluthe| 1.21.13 @ 8:54AM
You're correct. I've contended for a long time the lefts true goal is simple: Repealing the American Revolution. They view it as the single greatest tragedy in human history.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 11:16AM
You are a complete idiot. You don't even follow the tenets of the American Revolution - you just say you do.
CJW| 1.21.13 @ 12:20PM
Purpie the Village Idiot,
Just when I thought you could not get any more stupid yous say:
"Only an all powerful government can stop women from exercising their God-given choice."
So now God has give women the choice to kill an unborn child? When did God do this? Maybe your are confusing God with the Supreme Court
GobBluthe| 1.21.13 @ 1:27PM
There was a debate on TAS about 18 months ago between a clueless conservative scholar and hard leftist professor. The debate was: "Was the American Revolution a Just War" It was clear the leftist prof was arguing that the American Revolution was immoral. The clueless conservative didnt get it, that the leftist was in essence arguing that it was the ideals of the revolution that were distasteful. The clueless conservative argued from the stand point of the Catholic Church's definition of "Just War" but assumed the leftist didnt oppose the outcome, just the means.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 4:27PM
That was a stupid argument on the Left... but go ahead, paint the entire Left with that idiots views.
You on the right have plenty of idiots - shall we paint you all with the likes of Glenn Beck? Or Ann Coulter?
War is never "Just" - it just is. Necessary when other means fail...
War is simply an extension of politics when other means fail - paraphrased from Sun Tzu "The Art of War". And, it is the last resort, not the first.
GobBluthe| 1.21.13 @ 1:29PM
So you dont dispute the claim you want to repeal the American Revolution
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 4:28PM
Of course not, you idiot.
What a stupid, asinine statement ... Where did you go to school - or did you?
Joellen| 1.21.13 @ 7:49AM
Gary B - "and half of America knows it"; means that half of America approves of obama's transformation from a Republic to a marxist state.
Just read perps, annie, arnie and their ilks responses on this website alone. Right now the left seems stronger because of its impact in our culture.
The other day I was in a store. A young girl about four, with her Mom & Dad was being addressed by her Mom. The 4 year old yelled out "you f...... a...h... The Mother was agast, the father laughed his head off.
Our culture has become so debased, so crass, I believe if you look into that, it gives you HUGE clues as to why Obama/Biden (who is so classless); and the rest continue to be re-elected. Remember Marion Barry - caught smoking crack wiith a HOOKER and yet he won how many more elections Before they put him in jail.
Our culture reflects more than anything what's really going on in this country.
chuck| 1.21.13 @ 7:59AM
Agreed, we are over-indulging our kids, and the become self-absorbed brats. Then they grow up thinking the rest of us "owe" them everything they want.
Thank God I grew up in an era when you were actually expected to take care of yourself, your family, and teach your kids the same.
Gary B| 1.21.13 @ 8:12AM
Joellen,
Of course, you're correct. I guess another way to say it is this if part of the other half knows it, they don't care. If tyranny means zero personal responsibility, free phones and lots of reality TV, then bring on tyranny. You just can't get dummer than that. And who best to lead this low-information crowd to their own demise? The dictionary definition of the Devil is "the tempter of mankind and the ruler of hell." I guess we would have to say our Deal Leader is their guy.
What a mess... but, we will prevail because this dumb ass house of cards will collapse.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 11:18AM
Joey, Joey My Dear -
The Reagan Era is over. America followed his policies for over 30 years and look where we are?
America is rejecting the "Government is Bad" and "Deficits Don't Matter" and "Profit Above All" policies of the Reagan Era.
The promoters of his policies forgot that when the American people are hurt by the policy - ideology is rejected.
Reagan's legacy for all but his nuclear arms policy (which is carried on by Barack Obama) is TRASH, in the dustbin of history, finally.
And, Thank GOD, it's finally over. The Reagan damage is over. We are taking our country back and giving it back to the Middle Class and the Working Class - the rich and powerful be d*ed.
C. Vernon Crisler | 1.21.13 @ 12:02PM
Sad to say, the abandonment of Ronald Reagan has been occurring ever since George Bush Sr. The difference between Obama and moderate Republicans like the Bushes or Boehner is that the latter still pretend they are carrying on the Reagan legacy.
I agree with you about the rich and powerful. Obama's rich and powerful Hollywood friends and leftist heads of corporations should have a very special place in hell prepared for them.
Drunken Sailor| 1.21.13 @ 12:30PM
Now Vern, you really shouldn't use Purp's own words against him. That's low hanging fruit don't ya know.
CJW| 1.21.13 @ 12:21PM
Purpie the Village Idiot,
Just when I thought you could not get any more stupid yous say:
"Only an all powerful government can stop women from exercising their God-given choice."
So now God has give women the choice to kill an unborn child? When did God do this? Maybe your are confusing God with the Supreme Court
GobBluthe| 1.21.13 @ 1:32PM
America is rejecting "Deficits Dont Matter"????? You leftists have no shame about lying or you live in an alternative universe. Obama will have run up more debt in 8 years than the previous 230 combined. More in 3 than GW Bush did in 8.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 7:25PM
It was YOUR party that started the spending and borrowing over 30 years. Only a Democratic President produced balanced budgets (4times) in the last 30 years.
Then, right when you hand over a failing economy, debt up to the eyeballs, 2 Wars on Credit, Housing collapsing, Unemployment skyrocketing - then and ONLY then do you scream about deficits. What hypocrites. LMFAO...
Sorry, Pal, you have NO room to point the finger - Look in the Mirror and "Blame Yo'Self" ....
ROFL ... America doesn't believe you anymore, so you might as well shut up.
Joellen| 1.21.13 @ 3:31PM
First of all I am not your "dear"; and my name, as I am, is FEMININE, - I am NOT one of your femiNazi's.
Second of all perp, you're right - fools like you have made your choice - and you chose to destroy what was good about America, which President Reagan strove for, and replace it with your ill conceived marxist agenda with your marxist leader.
You continue in all your diatrabs to re-write history, which CJW, Albert TLP, Pecos, and those way more informed than you could ever be, not only refute your claims, but give concrete and detail facts to justify their retorts.
BTW - I've been blessed to go to Medugorje twice in the past 15 years; it was President Reagan & Pope John Paul who brought peace to Poland, Communist Russia, etc. and it was Clinton who Christian people there blame for the abuse that has been heaped on them since his inane bombing of the asprin factory and his inept dealings with the Serbs & Bosnia that you always seem to forget in your inaccurate messages.
And this country that you're taking back and giving to the middle & working class - speaking as the working class - I dont want it, and with every breath I have, like many Americans, will be fighting to bring it back to its Republic foundation.
CJW| 1.21.13 @ 5:44PM
Joellen,
Excellent reply.
BTW, you cannot really blame purpie for saying the words "Joey, Joey, My Dear..." since he was most likely writing a letter to Joey Biden, and does not know how to adress a woman.
So we have to be understanding of purpie.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 7:36PM
I give respect to those who've earned it. Most here have earned nothing but scorn from me.
And, don't bother - I neither desire or require respect from you.
Just your complete and utter assimilation will do.
Have a nice day on this Martin Luther King National Holiday and the Second Inauguration of President Barack Hussein Obama... Kinda gets you, doesn't it... :0)
CJW| 1.21.13 @ 9:36PM
Purpie the Village Idiot
Losing it purpieboy?
Nobody here wants respect from stupid, racist idiot like you. And you can be sure nobody has any respect for you. You are a fool, fit only for mocking and ridicule, especially with your own words.
Purp| 1.22.13 @ 2:13AM
You are obsessed with me and reprint everything I write.
What does it say about a person that keeps records of another person's writing? Secretly, down deep inside you want to have me, you yearn to be close to me... the more you keep and the more you publish, the more you display your sick attachment to me.
It's okay, I give to the Asylum for the Mentally Ill.
I hope you enjoy the tomes you keep - do you play with them and get yourself off with them?
Why else keep all the crap you keep?
You are not only a LOSER - You are one sick dude.
You need help desperately. Go to the hospital quick. LMFAO ... sick, sick puppy you are.
CJW| 1.21.13 @ 9:45PM
Purpie the Village Racist Idiot
I did have a nice MLK day. He was a great man, unlike obama.
And your purpie are still a stupid racist, in your own words:
"Oh, and YOU'RE a LOSER ... can't even beat the black man... you're so awful... hahahaha (that's for your last line, you wanna dish it out, then take it)"
Can't even beat the "black man?" So you believe blacks are inferior and easy to beat.
Keep posting moron, you provide fresh material every day.
You are truly an idiot and a racist"
Purp| 1.22.13 @ 2:13AM
You are obsessed with me and reprint everything I write.
What does it say about a person that keeps records of another person's writing? Secretly, down deep inside you want to have me, you yearn to be close to me... the more you keep and the more you publish, the more you display your sick attachment to me.
It's okay, I give to the Asylum for the Mentally Ill.
I hope you enjoy the tomes you keep - do you play with them and get yourself off with them?
Why else keep all the crap you keep?
You are not only a LOSER - You are one sick dude.
You need help desperately. Go to the hospital quick. LMFAO ... sick, sick puppy you are.
CJW| 1.22.13 @ 8:16AM
Purpie the Village Idiot
I post what you write to show in your own words what a stupid, racist, mysoginist idiot you are.
So get used to it and live with it.
It is easy, every day you give new material to show your idiocy.
Keep posting, moron.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 7:34PM
Oh, Dear Honey Babychild - It's too late for what you want. You just don't know it yet. Your 30 years is over.
30 years of Democratic/Liberal rule is your destiny.
If you outlive that period, maybe, maybe you'll be able to see another Conservadum take charge, but the likes of Governor Blimp of NJ, Senator Rocco Rubmeo of Florida, MoonBeam Gingrich or Congressman Paul "Lyin" Ryan will never be President. Hell most of them don't know how old the Earth is, let alone what time it is. LOL
" I dont want it, and with every breath I have, like many Americans, will be fighting to bring it back to its Republic foundation." - well, unfortunately for you, Tootsie, only 26% of America agrees with you in any shape, way or form.
Good luck with that ... or maybe you prefer the Republican definition of Rape - "Just lay back and enjoy it" ... is that you, Sweetie?
CJW| 1.21.13 @ 9:39PM
Purpie the Village Idiot
So now, in addition to being a stupid racist, you like to attack women, like a little sissy purpie?
Purp| 1.22.13 @ 2:14AM
You are obsessed with me and reprint everything I write.
What does it say about a person that keeps records of another person's writing? Secretly, down deep inside you want to have me, you yearn to be close to me... the more you keep and the more you publish, the more you display your sick attachment to me.
It's okay, I give to the Asylum for the Mentally Ill.
I hope you enjoy the tomes you keep - do you play with them and get yourself off with them?
Why else keep all the crap you keep?
You are not only a LOSER - You are one sick dude.
You need help desperately. Go to the hospital quick. LMFAO ... sick, sick puppy you are.
CJW| 1.22.13 @ 8:16AM
Purpie the Village Idiot
I post what you write to show in your own words what a stupid, racist, mysoginist idiot you are.
So get used to it and live with it.
It is easy, every day you give new material to show your idiocy.
Keep posting, moron.
GobBluthe| 1.21.13 @ 8:47AM
""Thus, it also means — and this would shock Ronald Reagan — that we conservatives really cannot trust the American public""""
The you gets Reagan voters in 1980 would be 50 in 2012. And indeed Romney won the over 50s by a large margin. In 1980, the electorate was still dominated by those born before ww2.
Conservative naval gazing isn't necessary. It's this simple. The 1965 Immigration Act and the NEA. That's it. Immigration and the schools. And it's not earshot reversible. Whst is certainly dead will be Reagan's sunny conservatism. How can it not be?
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 8:57AM
I remember the Reagan years, and I don't remember him being so great. Family farms were dying at enormous rates. He had high unemployment all through his first term, even though the recession he inherited wasn't nearly as bad as the one Obama did. He was mentally out of it during the second term. It ended with the Savings & Loan scandal, Iran-Contra, and all types of other illegal, and unethical activities.' Not to mention his illegal, and terrorist imperial foreign policy in Latin America. And the American job simply became less secure and stable.
But I do agree, in terms of policy Obama and Reagan are actually not so different, although I would say Clinton was closer to Reagan. All 3 of them are by leaps and bounds in quality and intellect better than W.
As for any mention of Obama being a far lefty, there is really no "Left" in America, especially now. There is a moderate party, the Democrats, and a far, radical right-wing party in the Republicans, which by the way, are not the same party of Reagan, and have virtually no resemblance to the party of Eisenhower. If the current Republican party existed in another country, they would be simply called appropriately, the 'radicals' or 'nationalists'.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 11:25AM
Reagan was not so great. He was likable, affable, a personality.
But his policies were hurtful to working people, who were fooled by his charm into believing otherwise. NOW they know and see it clearly, 30 years later.
There is a Left in this country, but the majority of America is in the middle to left of middle, where most Democrats are also.
I agree the far right has pulled the Republicans almost to the farthest radical right fringe (The House of RapeResentatives) - and that's why they lose and will continue to lose. Their policies suck, are useless or hurtful to most people, and are rejected by America and American Founding principles.
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 11:58AM
I agree Purp. When there are polls of specific policy goals, then the public does poll center left.
And yes, Reagan started very bad trends about attitudes towards working class people and government (being able to protect the working class). But all in all, his actual policies are not anything close to what the Republican party proposes today, which is an all out assault on the poor and middle class.
TLP| 1.21.13 @ 1:52PM
People 16 years of age, and older, not in the Workforce, increased by 8,332,000 in President No Jobs first Term.
President Share The Sacrifice, increased the Debt, per Household, by $50,521.
Gasoline is now twice as expensive as it was when he took office.
Ground Beef was $1.70 a lb. Today it's over $4.00 a lb.
Now he wants to "Finish What We Started".
Nice Plan.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 7:41PM
A Conservadum who presided over 30 years of deficits - with one interlude of a Democratic President with 4 budgets in surplus in a row - has no room or business to complain about anyone else.
Remember - you Conservadums started the practice of borrow and spend with Ronnie Baby, and ended with Bush Baby bankrupting the country and almost destroying the entire world's financial system.
Yeah, we want to follow YOUR plans again... NOT.
Obama saved the country from certain Great Depression and endless War ... and he's just getting started. Yeah, just getting started.
Your heads are gonna explode with what comes next!
Petronius| 1.21.13 @ 5:22PM
There is no assault on the poor and middle class from the Republicans: just disregard. The only thing they intimate in their maundering pronouncements, is that they are not obliged to subsidize anyone's deficiencies. Amen to that. What we now have in our corridors of power is really feudalism disguised as populism. Reagan was an aberration and the beltway establishment will continue to tar and feather his reputation until the next civil war, which is closer than anybody believes. This country is not big enough for the traditional American culture of economic Liberty in an Ordered society, and the despotic, wastrel, nihilistic anthill inflicted upon us through the elite's control of a super-ignorant infantile mob. I do wish we had a Man like him in the Presidents chair today. The late 80's were the best years of my life.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 7:48PM
" The only thing they intimate in their maundering pronouncements, is that they are not obliged to subsidize anyone's deficiencies. Amen to that. " - you'll pay for that blasphemy.
You have just confirmed how anti-Christian, anti-God and anti-Religious you Conservadums are. How against the poor, downtrodden and least among us you are.
We knew it, but there you have it ... and you're proud of it. My, my...
The Feudalism of which you speak is Corporate Feudalism where we all serve the Feudal Corporate Lords. Try and argue that you don't. Try and argue that you are not a serf to GE, IBM, WalMart, and many, many other MultiNationals that couldn't care less about America and Americans...
You're kidding yourself if you think you've had economic liberty over the last 30 years - you haven't.
If the late 80's were the best of your life, I feel sorry for you. I remember a better time before that, perhaps a time you never knew.
But we are poised now to take back our country from the Robber Barons of the 2000's - the Adelsons, and Kochs, the Citibanks and AIGs and their ilk, where profit is the only motive. Where people are commodities like steel or paper or cardboard - business expenses to be reduced as much as possible.
CJW| 1.21.13 @ 12:22PM
Purpie the Village Idiot,
Just when I thought you could not get any more stupid yous say:
"Only an all powerful government can stop women from exercising their God-given choice."
So now God has give women the choice to kill an unborn child? When did God do this? Maybe your are confusing God with the Supreme Court
Von Mises Jr| 1.21.13 @ 12:59PM
Hey CJW, It looks like Perp is on top today. Tomorrow is Arnie's turn to be on top.
CJW| 1.21.13 @ 2:19PM
Von
They are trying to convince us they are two different persons by having a conversation. Same person.
CJW| 1.21.13 @ 2:59PM
Von
You do know Purparnie is an economics expert. He said that the 20% tax rate cut would mean that those paying 0% would go to 8%.
Problem is he really does believe it.
Von Mises Jr| 1.21.13 @ 4:29PM
CJW
I wouldn't know since I refuse to read his bullshit. I would prefer to just make fun of him. It doesn't take much brain power and it is mere amusement.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 7:52PM
You're just wasting your words ... I laugh at your obsequiousness.
Anthony| 1.21.13 @ 8:48PM
Wow, moron thinks he learned a new word today. However moron, if your response was to CJW, then you haven't the slightest understanding of what obsequiousness means.
What a troll!!
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 7:52PM
I don't give a s**t what you think...
I never said that - but it won't happen anyway - now that you LOST and LOST BIG. And it's soooo nice to know you lost. You were rejected by your fellow Americans. Now go do yourself in with your own gun and do America a favor.
CJW| 1.21.13 @ 9:47PM
Purpie the Village Idiot
Losing it purpieboy?
CJW| 1.21.13 @ 10:06PM
Purpie the Village Idiot is advocating gun violence, like the little totalitarian lefty he is.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 7:49PM
I wouldn't take you if you paid me a million... skanky, old fart.
Purp| 1.22.13 @ 2:14AM
You are obsessed with me and reprint everything I write.
What does it say about a person that keeps records of another person's writing? Secretly, down deep inside you want to have me, you yearn to be close to me... the more you keep and the more you publish, the more you display your sick attachment to me.
It's okay, I give to the Asylum for the Mentally Ill.
I hope you enjoy the tomes you keep - do you play with them and get yourself off with them?
Why else keep all the crap you keep?
You are not only a LOSER - You are one sick dude.
You need help desperately. Go to the hospital quick. LMFAO ... sick, sick puppy you are.
CJW| 1.22.13 @ 8:17AM
Purpie the Village Idiot
I post what you write to show in your own words what a stupid, racist, mysoginist idiot you are.
So get used to it and live with it.
It is easy, every day you give new material to show your idiocy.
Keep posting, moron.
GobBluthe| 1.21.13 @ 1:35PM
Family Farms suffered from high interest rates brought on to fight inflation
Unemployment peaked at 10.9%, the recession of 1980-82 wasnt worse in terms of drop in GDP, it was worse in terms of unemployment
S&Ls; were deregulated in 1980 under Carter.
Reagan's policies in Latin America brought about free elections.
There is nothing moderate party in the Demcrats:
Card Check
Carbon Taxes
Trillion Dollar Defcits
Govt spending at post WW2 as a % of GDP
Obamacare
Govt funded abortion
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 3:34PM
GoBluthe,
Yes, the unemployment rate was worse under Reagan than under Obama.
You seem to forget the Garn–St. Germain Depository Institutions Act that helped deregulate S&Ls; in 1982.
In any case, deregulation was not the banner of the Democratic Party or liberals. Deregulation was the raison d'etre of the Republicans.
And there were free elections in Latin America long before Reagan got involved. In fact, there were many dictatorships in Latin America because of American support for them.
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 8:57AM
Obama and Clinton were actually more classically conservative in not making unilateral invasions, having a more reserved foreign policy and working with allies (sans Bin Laden raid). As for taxes, they are all pretty much the same. Really the parties quibble over the smallest percentages, considering when we used to balance the budget as needed, no matter the high tax rates that were needed. And Obama, Clinton, and Reagan are all so much better with American soft power. The only difference I would say, is that Clinton and Obama recognized that good and smart regulation can actually be better for an economy. Reagan really started the trend of idiotic deregulation, simply because, deregulation was good by definition for him, even though the actual policies ended up in disaster (see financial industry crashes of the last 30 years.)
Anyway, I'm pretty sure, that Reagan wouldn't survive a Republican primary today. For god sakes, he came from California.
The worst things to come out of the Reagan administration: Cheney and Rumsfeld.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 9:07AM
Seriously, Arnie, how old are you? I doubt that you were yet in school by the time that Reagan left office.
Meanwhile, to begin to disassemble your patchwork of historical inaccuracy, Rumsfeld was the Defense Secretary for Gerald Ford. Cheney was the Defense Secretary for George H.W. Bush.
Ooooops.
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 9:19AM
Yes, you are correct, but Rumsfeld also did work for the Reagan administration as special envoy to the Middle East. Cheney was very influential in that administration, especially to the first George Bush, who nominated him a Secretary of Defense. That's what I meant. They didn't start with Reagan, but their stature surely excelled during those years.
By the way, I started school in the seventies.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 9:30AM
“Obama and Clinton were actually more classically conservative in not making unilateral invasions, having a more reserved foreign policy and working with allies (sans Bin Laden raid).”
I imagine for the target, it matters little if one is killed by a soldier with an M-4 carbine, or a smart bomb. For Clinton, Operation Desert Fox (December 1998) and the Kosovo Air War (March-June 1999), along with the Sudanese aspirin factory (August 1998) are but a few examples of Clinton acting “unilaterally” (i.e. without U.N. resolution or direct Congressional authorization). For Obama, the 2011 Libyan operation also qualifies, and most Predator drone strikes (at least in Pakistan) might conflict with the definition of “working with allies” (though this might make them more effective).
As Reagan said, it was not so much that his opponents were ignorant, the problem stemmed from the fact that they knew so much that wasn’t so.
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 9:37AM
Kosovo and Libya were backed by the U.N. and NATO. There's a big difference. Ooooops.
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 9:40AM
And with Libya, that was primarily a British and French operation.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 9:51AM
Obama certainly sought to take the credit, though, didn't he?
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 10:00AM
I'm pretty sure Obama said the policy was a success and that we worked with our allies. So yes, he did.
I guess that's too bad for you.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 10:54AM
Actually, I don't think it's "too bad" for me. I do think that is is sad for the Doherty, Smith, Woods and Stevens family, though, how the Obama administration bungled Libya.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 12:00PM
Albie - Libya bungled Libya. Our President is responsible for American soil - not Libyan security - and that's where the breakdown occurred.
Paint it on Obama all you want, but that's why it isn't sticking - it's not on him. Another reason you lost - you hate Obama and you will blame him for anything and everything, even when it's not true.
CJW| 1.21.13 @ 12:29PM
Purpiarnie the Village Idiot says God caused Hurricane Sandy to help Obama. Purpie believes God killed hundreds and destroyed millions of dollars of property to help Obama win:
"Purp| 11.8.12 @ 10:35AM
"The Lord rules, not Obama." - CORRECT!
The Lord works in mysterious ways... and this is something for the faithful to contemplate in the way the see the world:
Hurricane Sandy and Chris Christie was the Lord's way of pressing his thumb on the scale to tilt in the direction of President Obama. It was His punishment of Republicans for their lying and trying to cheat (Voter Suppression) their way to political victory, while espousing faith, freedom and constitutional credentials.
Some soul searching of conservative attitudes is in order, for sure."
Why answer this stupid, bigoted moron, just mock and ridicule him with his own words.
Purp| 1.22.13 @ 2:15AM
Closet CJ - You are obsessed with me and reprint everything I write.
What does it say about a person that keeps records of another person's writing? Secretly, down deep inside you want to have me, you yearn to be close to me... the more you keep and the more you publish, the more you display your sick attachment to me.
It's okay, I give to the Asylum for the Mentally Ill.
I hope you enjoy the tomes you keep - do you play with them and get yourself off with them?
Why else keep all the crap you keep?
You are not only a LOSER - You are one sick dude.
You need help desperately. Go to the hospital quick. LMFAO ... sick, sick puppy you are.
CJW| 1.22.13 @ 8:18AM
Purpie the Village Idiot
I post what you write to show in your own words what a stupid, racist, mysoginist idiot you are.
So get used to it and live with it.
It is easy, every day you give new material to show your idiocy.
Keep posting, moron.
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 1:37PM
I'm just curious, how many American personel were lost in Iraq? I'm betting a little partisan hack like you never rose a stick about the hundreds lost there.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 9:50AM
Check your favorite source Wikipedia again, Arnie. While Kosovo had NATO (hell, it was NATO), it didn't have the UN, and the US Congress voted to reject it.
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 9:59AM
NATO meant he worked with allies. Get it?
And the U.N. never opposed the NATO actions and supported the cease fire it helped create.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U....._in_Kosovo
And what about Libya, Sir Albert Always Incorrect?
This is all much different than Reagan's foreign policy in Latin America. Understood?
(You're getting pummeled by the way)
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 10:30AM
I’m thinking that if you have to tell me (and everyone else) that I’m being pummeled, that maybe it means that it isn’t exactly obvious.
Since I defined unilateral without Congressional authorization or UN resolution in support of it (that’s what “ ‘unilaterally’ (i.e. without U.N. resolution or direct Congressional authorization)” means), and you are unable to produce one for either of the examples that you cite, if I was as inane and obnoxious as you are, I’d follow with something like “you lose”.
Instead, I’ll let those who might care to follow what is here posted decide on how they think the duel is going. Meanwhile, the judges aren’t giving it to you on the facts.
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 10:37AM
Oh, so that's your definition of unilateral. I meant acting with NATO, the U.N., or both.
So yes, Kosovo and Libya qualify for both of these criteria.
As for Reagan, his actions don't qualify at all, and were definitely unilateral.
Even by your own definition, Libya was not unilateral, and Reagan's were.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 10:52AM
“Even by your own definition, Libya was not unilateral”
Which UN resolution authorized the 2011 intervention in Libya? When did Congress give their approval?
By the way, while I defined unilaterally, do not make the mistake to presume that merely because one has a UN resolution or congressional authorization an action is right, or in their absence, an action is wrong (e.g. We unilaterally declared war on Japan on December 8, 1941; and unilaterally declared our Independence on July 4, 1776).
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 10:55AM
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WO.....index.html
It is United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 11:12AM
From your source, the No Fly Zone authorized by that resolution was neither sufficient, nor the sum total of our activities in Libya:
…The U.S. military does not view a no-fly zone alone as sufficient to stop Gadhafi...
…U.S. military officials have said that a no-fly zone would not halt the heavy artillery the regime is using on the ground…
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 11:34AM
You are grasping at straws my friend.
That U.N. resolution did allow NATO to enforce a no-fly zone. The language in the resolution allowed broad flexibility, and "protection of citizens", and the only thing it didn't allow was troops on the ground. Which did not happen. Libyans were happy with it, the U.N. was happy with it, NATO was happy with it.
This was a fine example of diplomacy and cooperation.
Here's from the U.N. itself.
http://www.un.org/News/Press/d.....00.doc.htm
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 11:48AM
Of course, the UN press release and CNN story are from March of 2011. Subsequent reports were a bit more nuanced, however:
"Obama had faced criticism for an initially slow response to the Libyan uprising and then set strict limits on the U.S. role in the NATO air assault, which was sanctioned by the United Nations as a means of stopping the massacre of civilians.
But the White House felt its approach bore fruit when rebel forces took Tripoli, and it used Gaddafi's death to reinforce that argument."
There is nothing in the UN resolution about regime change, is there? Regardless of how one feels about Qaddafi's death, we all now know how well that involvement has turned out for the diplomacy of the US (or should I say the diplomats of the US, whose ranks were reduced by four this past September, when we failed to act unilaterally or any other way when they were under assault).
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 12:04PM
Albie, Albie - there you go again. The War Powers Act of Congress gives the President authority to commit Armed Forces to conflicts overseas for at least 60 days without additional Congressional approval. Mixed signals came from Congress but the limited involvement in Libya toppled a dictator (you should applaud), gave democratic principles a chance in Libya (you should also applaud) and it was over with NO American troops on the ground.
What ARE you beotching about?
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 12:17PM
I am aware of what the War Powers Act authorizes (by the way, our overseas military involvement in Libya lasted more than 60 days), as well as its questionable (if not yet challenged) constitutionality. I have merely pointed out that Obama has acted without Congressional authorization in Libya (as well as exceeded the UN Resolution).
While I haven't commented that to do so is bad ( I have suggested that the outcome is Libya is), I am pointing out that it is hypocritical to criticize others for acting in this matter, while supporting it when Obama does it.
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 12:37PM
Albert, you can not compare the efforts of Kosovo and Libya to Reagan's efforts in Latin America. As we have just discussed, the actions of the Democratic presidents were far more reserved, diplomatic, and cooperative. I agree, Clinton's bombing of that factory was horrible, but a small action compared to funding terrorists in Central America for several years.
I'm merely pointing out the differences in those foreign policy actions.
To tell you the truth, I don't think the US should really be involved in any other countries at all. I believe the foreign policy should be that of Ron Paul. Simply protect the homeland in a defensive fashion. But if the international community should choose to help these or those people, that is a much better option than single handedly funding terrorists to topple democratically elected governments.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 1:59PM
During Carter’s administration, Nicaragua went communist, and El Salvador was under assault by communist backed guerillas.
Reagan’s foreign policy in Central America prevented the further expansion of communist regimes in El Salvador, and helped eventually lead to the electoral defeat of the brutal communist Sandinista regime in Nicaragua in 1990 (though, as freer people, they did eventually re-elect the Marxist Ortega in 2006 after he moderated to democratic socialism, supported by Hugo Chavez).
You can dispute his foreign policy methods (including the Organization of American States supported Grenada liberation), but there were fewer communist regimes in the years after he left office then there were before, which was one of the goals he espoused and ran for election to achieve.
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 2:13PM
"brutal communist Sandinista regime"
Funny, because I went there in the 90s, and all anybody could talk about was the brutality of the Contras (Reagan's terrorists), and the fact it was so stupid that Reagan thought little ol' Nicaragua was a threat. Interesting.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 2:33PM
Of course, they could talk about it, because the Sandinistas were no longer in power after Violet Chamorro's anti-Sandinista coalition defeated Ortega in 1990.
Maybe Reagan thought Nicaragua was a threat due to Ortega's trips to Moscow and his embrace of communism, the communist guerillas in El Salvador receiving support from him, etc.
Perhaps you don't feel that international communism was a threat, or that the Soviet Union did not mean us harm (and were merely misunderstood collectivists).
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 2:34PM
But you know, I guess they could be a bunch of ungrateful communists, instead of people that just wanted to run their own country as they saw fit, by themselves.
I guess they should be grateful that their women and children were killed by Reagan funded terrorists. What do you think?
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 4:00PM
I think if they wanted to run their country by themselves, Ortega would have been there, instead of Moscow, or exporting weapons to the communist guerillas in El Salvador (it is kind of tough to whine when the international counterrevolution took notice, and turned their techniques back on them).
Arnie| 1.22.13 @ 2:52AM
Ok, now you are just making up stuff in addition to defining English words as you see fit, i.e. please look up the definition of unilateral.
As for your completely off the mark comment, to try to muddy the debate, Ortega was elected president of Nicaragua by free and fair elections in 1984, in a multiparty system, and was there. Reagan funded child and women killing terrorists that also tortured Nicaraguans, when that country had no chance of ever threatening America. Maybe you think a poor, little country like Nicaragua could be a threat to the United States, as your comments indicate that you swallow Republican propaganda with gusto.
So I guess you are happy about that because your St. Ronnie did it. It just goes to show you are an immoral person, and a partisan hack.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.22.13 @ 5:22PM
I am happy about it because it worked at the time. Communism, on the march in Latin America in 1980, was slowed down quite a bit as a result of the Reagan efforts there.
CJW| 1.21.13 @ 2:20PM
Albert
Anna said he is "20 year old."
Anthony| 1.21.13 @ 9:26AM
Wow, the poster child for the Obozo low information voter has spoken. If this moron actually did live through the Reagan years, it was before the mentally ill were main streamed back into the population.
And now we have millions of these zombies walking around. Is there any doubt as to why medicinal marajuana is so popular with the left?
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 12:05PM
YOU obviously need some ...
Anthony| 1.21.13 @ 1:59PM
According to Drudge, a scientist is looking for a woman willing to become impregnated with the DNA of Purp or Arnie in order to bring the Neanderthal race back to life.
Somebody needs to tell this scientist he's too late, Neanderthals are thriving, we just call them Democrats instead.
Miles Glorious| 1.21.13 @ 3:40PM
That"s a insult to Neanderthals
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 7:58PM
Miles to Go - then you are insulting yourself fool.
Go look it up - see if you beat Lil' Tony to it.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 7:57PM
Little Anthony - was that your attempt at a jab? If you knew anything, you'd know that we all have Neanderthal DNA in us, so they never really disappeared. You can Google that - ya, you can. You do know how to do that, dontcha? Conservadums do use Google dontcha?
Care to try again? I propose you go learn something first.
Anthony| 1.21.13 @ 8:56PM
Not my words moron, it was the scientist who used the term DNA.
And if indeed we do have Neanderthal DNA still in us, then indeed you have finally identified the one great factor that distinguishes real Americans from low information Democrats, like you.
Hey Purp, if Obozo isn't getting his second Nobel Prize for teleprompter reading, maybe you deserve one for finally finding the missing link, Democrats!!!
CJW| 1.21.13 @ 9:51PM
Anthony
I think you upset little purpie, he gonna cry.
He is a cafone.
Purp| 1.22.13 @ 2:07AM
No one here can upset me...you know nothing and certainly not about me.
You don't know sarcasm, you don't know irony, you don't know mockery when it's right in your face... you just think you do.
Please explain what "broadening the tax base means" ? Mitt Romney couldn't - can you ? When you figure it out, altho I highly doubt you will - you'll understand a little more about a progressive tax structure.
CJW| 1.22.13 @ 8:18AM
Purpie the Village Idiot
I post what you write to show in your own words what a stupid, racist, mysoginist idiot you are.
So get used to it and live with it.
It is easy, every day you give new material to show your idiocy.
Keep posting, moron.
GobBluthe| 1.21.13 @ 1:38PM
I hope youre not taking about the Afghan Invasion that was a NATO mission, had nearly unanamous congressional support and was endorsed by the UN.
Can you name some regulations Clinton added? I know he got rid of Glass Steagal.
If Reagan would be unelectable in the GOP today, explain McCain and Romney.
Cheney and Rumsfeld came from Ford.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 9:02AM
To the extent that Reagan was beloved, he made people feel good about being Americans (citizens of “the shining city on the hill”). Obama has helped nail down his coalition through free stuff (Oooobamaphoooooonnee), demonizing his enemies (“Romney sucks”) and ignoring the Constitution (the charter of negative liberties now supplanted by czars and executive orders).
TLP| 1.21.13 @ 9:34AM
He doesn't understand you.
You have to remember that he reads these things with his hands over his ears, shaking his head from side to side, and saying: "Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah."
In true Liberal Speak, Anna's little boy blurts out Nonsence, figuring that everyone is as Stupid as all of his fellow Club Kids are, and would never actually have any Facts to counter his Fairy Tales. When someone like you - who's not a little drone with an Obama Plate Collection in his room at his Mom's Apartment - comes along with actual Facts and Figures at your disposal, and puts the Truth to Arnie's Talking Point Lies?
All of a sudden realizes that he's a Punk, and falls back on Plan B: When caught with your dick in your hand, tell them: "That's not what I meant to say".
Pathetic.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 12:06PM
You mean like what EVERY Republican Elected Official says, dick in hand, to Rush Limbaugh, the day AFTER they disagreed with him?
You mean like that "That's not what I meant to say"... LMFAO .. you're such a hypocrite.
CJW| 1.21.13 @ 12:31PM
Purp the Village Idiot says God caused Hurricane Sandy to help Obama. Purpie believes God killed hundreds and destroyed millions of dollars of property to help Obama win:
"Purp| 11.8.12 @ 10:35AM
"The Lord rules, not Obama." - CORRECT!
The Lord works in mysterious ways... and this is something for the faithful to contemplate in the way the see the world:
Hurricane Sandy and Chris Christie was the Lord's way of pressing his thumb on the scale to tilt in the direction of President Obama. It was His punishment of Republicans for their lying and trying to cheat (Voter Suppression) their way to political victory, while espousing faith, freedom and constitutional credentials.
Some soul searching of conservative attitudes is in order, for sure."
Why answer this stupid, bigoted moron, just mock and ridicule him with his own words.
Purp| 1.22.13 @ 2:16AM
You are obsessed with me and reprint everything I write.
What does it say about a person that keeps records of another person's writing? Secretly, down deep inside you want to have me, you yearn to be close to me... the more you keep and the more you publish, the more you display your sick attachment to me.
It's okay, I give to the Asylum for the Mentally Ill.
I hope you enjoy the tomes you keep - do you play with them and get yourself off with them?
Why else keep all the crap you keep?
You are not only a LOSER - You are one sick dude.
You need help desperately. Go to the hospital quick. LMFAO ... sick, sick puppy you are.
CJW| 1.22.13 @ 8:18AM
Purpie the Village Idiot
I post what you write to show in your own words what a stupid, racist, mysoginist idiot you are.
So get used to it and live with it.
It is easy, every day you give new material to show your idiocy.
Keep posting, moron.
TLP| 1.21.13 @ 1:56PM
Actually, I mean like you do,when confronted with any and all Facts.
I'd say that you already know this, but you think you're a Girl.
So, what's the point?
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 7:59PM
I'd be proud to be a Girl - if only to do a Lorena Bobbit on you... Go look it up if you missed the "subtle" meaning.
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 9:34AM
Albert, you're not being honest. The Republicans after Obama's first election, they met and decided to have a policy of saying no to everything he did, to be a complete opposition, just for opposition sake. They even admit to it. If anyone started demonizing, it was them. If Obama says the Republicans suck, because they cause gridlock and make up fantastical conspiracies and call him a communist, muslim, terrorist etc.. with no basis what so ever, it's just an accurate statement on his part. My gosh, this type of behavior is on this website everyday. How could possibly be expected to work with people like that?
This is my point. The current Republican party is composed of radicals way outside the mainstream, that don't resemble the party of Reagan, and definitely Eisenhower, in hardly any way.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 9:47AM
Your deliberate ignorance of the historical record is staggering. Obama’s quote “I won” in 2009 summarized his attitude towards working with Republicans (whom he didn’t need to work with due to having majorities in the House and Senate at the time). The American people responded to his approach by turning the House back to the Republicans in 2010, and continuing that in 2012, despite the massive Democrat/ Obama campaign apparatus.
Obama began his political career not only by demonizing his opponents, but by eliminating them by having previously sealed records unsealed.
As far as this website goes, it is far from an outlet of the RNC. Criticism of Republicans is almost as universal as the criticism of your Dear Leader. You project when you suggest others are not honest; you are not only dishonest, you are wrong (again) on the facts.
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 10:05AM
"Obama’s quote “I won” in 2009 summarized his attitude towards working with Republicans"
Yes, I've read about this moment, when Boner was suggesting Obama implement all of the Republicans' ideas, after he had won the election. Yes, very strange comment indeed. I can't imagine why he would state the truth. But I bet it Boner's feelings and made him cry.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 10:32AM
"But I bet it Boner's feelings and made him cry."
Clearly, it upset you (and your premise) enough that you couldn't make a coherent sentence about it (but then, lack of coherence is nothing unusual for you).
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 10:39AM
Oh, Albert, do you feel sad for Boner the crying wank?
Really, get real. Obama won big in 2008 and Democrats had huge majorities, yet Boner wanted Republican bills. Get. Real.
You're just a sore loser.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 10:55AM
You do get shriller each time you argument is shredded, Arnie.
TLP| 1.21.13 @ 10:59AM
Again: He doesn't understand you.
You have to remember that he reads these things with his hands over his ears, shaking his head from side to side, and saying: "Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah."
In true Liberal Speak, Anna's little boy blurts out Nonsence, figuring that everyone is as Stupid as all of his fellow Club Kids are, and would never actually have any Facts to counter his Fairy Tales. When someone like you - who's not a little drone with an Obama Plate Collection in his room at his Mom's Apartment - comes along with actual Facts and Figures at your disposal, and puts the Truth to Arnie's Talking Point Lies?
All of a sudden realizes that he's a Punk, and falls back on Plan B: When caught with your dick in your hand, tell them: "That's not what I meant to say".
Pathetic.
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 11:03AM
What is your argument Albert? All I wrote is that Republicans decided to oppose Obama, no matter what. Which is TRUE. They admit to it.
And your argument boils down to Obama simply telling Boner, "I won.", and hence all the stupid behavior of the Republicans is reasonable. Wow. Amazing analysis there Albert. I mean, are Democrats not allowed to acknowledge they won an election? Is that what you have a problem with?
Seriously man, you ain't got a leg to stand on with this one. The Republicans just plain suck.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 11:17AM
Every one of the Republicans he said it to also won their elections. If he wanted to work together with them, he could have, but just as they chose to oppose Obama, Obama and the Democrats chose to pursue their own agenda. As a result, Nancy Pelosi is no longer Speaker of the House.
I'm not arguing for the Republicans, I'm arguing that your facts are not factual, which is not particularly difficult to do.
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 11:46AM
But just because a single Republican won a seat, doesn't mean they get to dictate legislation. I'm pretty sure that in every democracy the party that has the majority of power, usually, gets to set the terms, or at least, the direction of policy.
And to take even more creedence from your absolutely flimsy and absurd argument, is that the meeting of Republicans happened on the night of the inauguration, Jan. 20th. The meeting that Obama had with Republicans, when he said reasonably, "I won", happened Jan. 23rd.
So this means that the Republicans decided to oppose Obama, before they even met with them.
Ooooops. It seems like the Republicans poisoned the well first. It wasn't Obama.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 11:57AM
Your time line proves nothing, and is irrelevant. Obama had no plans to compromise his agenda in order to gain Republican support, and vice versa. To say someone poisoned the well first is the argument of a child.
He was elected, as was everyone else. He could choose to work with the other party, or not. He gave them a choice: do what I want. They said no. Whether they decided before the meeting or during it doesn't matter; each made their choice.
You trying to blame one side is the act of a fool, just as I engage in a fool's errand when I point out truth to you.
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 12:20PM
Albert, history does matter, and the facts say a lot here about the childish behavior of the Republicans.
I have provided evidence that Republicans went into the meeting with the agenda of opposing Obama, but your assertion that Obama had no intention of working with them is just BS. I'm sorry. Your assertion is pure conjecture. You have no evidence of it. You simply just assume or "think" Obama wanted to oppose them. In fact, it flies in the face of everything Obama had said previously, unlike the Republicans.
And then, with the stimulus package, Obama bucked most of the Democratic party just to get Republican votes. He made around 40% of it tax breaks. Democrats wanted a bill that was almost completely composed of stimulus spending ala the works programs of FDR. And still the Republicans did not vote for it at all. So in fact, he had put in things that they wanted. This also applies to the health care bill. And financial regulation. Over and over again, Democrats and Obama made concessions with the hopes of getting Republican support, and they still never never got any.
And after all this time, after the most absurd Republican caucus of the ages, I actually think the Democrats and Obama should totally abandon the idea of working with Republicans. It's simply a waste of time.
I can't change your mind as to what you want to believe. But I can tell you that you have no basis for your opinion.
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 12:20PM
Honestly, in regards to these negotiations, what could Obama have done that would have satisfied you? Would we have had to abandon all the policy goals of the Democratic Party?
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 12:44PM
There is very little likelihood that much Obama would have done would satisfy me, which was why I didn’t vote for him.
But suppose he wanted to reach out to those who didn’t vote for him. As he campaigned in 2008 against the expansion of the deficit, before proposing nearly a trillion dollars in stimulus ( in reality, kickbacks to favored groups who supported his campaign) spending in 2009 after he was elected, he could have cut more than a trillion from the budget. Then, at least, I wouldn’t be able to saying he was lying when he told people that he thought running up the deficit was unpatriotic (unless, of course, his intentions in doing so are unpatriotic).
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 12:52PM
"There is very little likelihood that much Obama would have done would satisfy me"
OMG. Well, there's the answer. The Republican party in a nutshell. You guys can't be satisfied anyhow.
Well, how about this. We raise taxes on the rich, so we don't impact working class people that much, and cut the military budget by about 80%, if you are so concerned about the deficit.
TLP| 1.21.13 @ 12:50PM
He says that he Will Not Negotiate with the Republicans.
Do you understand English?
Or, just Annaspeak?
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 12:50PM
"Democrats and Obama made concessions with the hopes of getting Republican support, and they still never never got any."
Never, never? I seem to recall debt ceiling increases, and the Fiscal Cliff votes, to name but a few (not that those are good things, but are examples of what you claim does not exist).
You can tell me I have no basis, but like just about everything else you do, you are once again wrong, as those facts demonstrate.
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 1:02PM
Oh, are you refering to the hostage negotiations of trying to extract concessions from the poorer people of America, old people on Social Security Medicare, and Medicaid, by the Republican party over regular debt ceiling raises, on spending that was already approved?
A few Republicans voted for those because they knew they would be responsible for crashing the markets of their beloved corporations and the credit rating of the U.S. The whole thing was a farcical dance started by them. They put themselves into that situation. They did not vote for it because they happily made legislation with Obama.
And it's absolutely no civilized way to make legislation. So there are your facts Albert. This was a good discussion
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 1:09PM
Discussion? It was more a case on your part of:
Deny the facts; when the facts are irrefutable, deny the premise; when the premise can’t be assailed, deny the conclusion.
I sure I hope my disassembly of all of your points didn’t distract you from the Inauguration, but I’m sure you will get to all of the Balls tonight.
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 1:25PM
Oh poor Albert. You were wrong, wrong, wrong. Rumsfeld worked for Reagan, Cheney was close to the Reagan's vice president, and ended up working for him. The Republicans never wanted to work with Obama, and you admitted there was nothing he could do that would satisfy you anyway. And Kosovo and Libya were not unilateral actions.
You got bitch smacked hard today. Quit embarressing yourself.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 1:38PM
"Quit embarressing yourself"
In order to avoid embarrassing yourself, you should learn to spell embarrass. Cheney was in Congress during the entire Reagan administration, and was so close to GHW Bush that he nominated John Tower to be Secretary of Defense first. Rumsfeld was in the private sector after Ford lost, only doing part time duty as envoy and serving on commissions until GWB won in 2000. Neither Kosovo nor Libya had congressional authorization, the latter had a UN resolution for a no fly zone which we exceeded, and have begun to experience the blowback as a result.
Once again, your slap misses. Try to throw a punch like a man sometime.
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 1:54PM
Oh, you are a stooopid girl.....oh, sorry. STUPID girl.... If you didn't understand that the first time.
Sorry, if I'm not too concerned about typos for a W loving fanboy.
Later Bushie.
TLP| 1.21.13 @ 2:03PM
And, just like that, Butt Plug Boy loses the argument.
Well Done, Albert.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 2:06PM
It is kind of funny, as GWB is only mentioned in historical reference, but when you're called on your ineptitude, somehow "It's George W. Bush's fault".
The ability to take responsibility for what you do is a characteristic of a man instead of a boy, Arnie. Your shrillness suggests that neither is an appropriate label for you, but if it will make you feel better to call me a girl, or drag queen (not that there's anything wrong with that), who am I to interfere. I just point at what you do and laugh.
Drunken Sailor| 1.21.13 @ 1:59PM
Valiant effort Al, but you forget, facts do not matter and Democrats are never wrong, in the Liberal Mantra.
We will point out the things GW did that we do not agree with but it is a rarity that a Democrat supporter will say Obama does any wrong.
TLP| 1.21.13 @ 2:05PM
It's not a rarity.
It's an Impossibility.
You're more likely to see a Unicorn, than you are to get THE TRUTH out of one of these Lemmings.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 2:08PM
I'm just trying to keep them from enjoying the coronation today by being kept busy here.
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 2:17PM
Hey Albert, is working with the U.N. and NATO considered a unilateral action?
Did Rumsfeld work for Reagan? Was Cheney close to George Bush, Reagan's vice president?
Did Republicans admit that they were going to oppose Obama no matter what before they even met them?
I just want to be clear about this.
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 2:20PM
Oh wait, that's right. You guys live in a FOX altered version of reality.
Later girls.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 2:34PM
You keep saying "Later", but like everything else you post, you have no credibility, because you remain.
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 2:41PM
Can't answer the questions because you can't? Ok. Then this is truly goodbye. I'll leave you to your lover TLP.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 4:09PM
It is quite curious that a person of the Left would go around trying to insult those with whom he has disagreements by suggesting that that person is a homosexual. What makes you so insecure, Arnie, that you just can’t leave when you say you will, and have to try to somehow deflate my argument by stating that I am gay?
I am not the first to notice this about you. If homosexuality is just a lifestyle choice, how would tarring me with the gay brush invalidate my argument? You better be careful, your far lefty credentials may be revoked if you continue to pursue this line, and you may be forced to undergo reeducation by Kevin Jennings.
I suppose an alternative thought might be that you are just an ill-mannered, immature leftist who can’t compete in the free market of ideas, so you live in the world of cut and paste and childish insults to mask (poorly) your lack of substance.
Arnie| 1.22.13 @ 3:06AM
I kid you guys because YOU guys are obvious homophobes.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.22.13 @ 5:27PM
Arnie, you don't kid, because you don't have a sense of humor, or any other perspective by which reality can be judged.
Calling other people homophobes to mask your own insecurities is just one of your many faults.
You're an odious phony who is not likely to impress during your probationary period. You need to improve the quality of your posts if you're not to be laid off at your upcoming evaluation; the volume isn't helping you.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 12:13PM
The problem for you Albie is that Conservadums' ideas are not wanted and were soundly rejected by the American people.
The Rombot, in Conservadum clothing, was rejected, but so was you entire agenda, in Red State after Red State. Not all mind you, some are a little slower than others, ya know.
What you miss is that the RNC and Republicans in general, that subscribed to your far right wing radicalism lost, and lost BIG. America rejects you and your far flung ideas that no one wants.
They have been hurtful to America, and Americans rejected them and you resoundingly.
With the one exception of fiscal responsibility - which none on the right have ACTUALLY displayed - there is nothing, nothing in your agenda America friendly. And, so, you LOST, you will continue to lose.
And Reagan is dead, let his tragic policies die with him - FINALLY.
I voted for the man, so yeah, I was there, so don't throw your "are you old enough to know" insults. It's you who is too stupid to know better. And, so history is passing your by.
CJW| 1.21.13 @ 12:33PM
Purp the Village Idiot says God caused Hurricane Sandy to help Obama. Purpie believes God killed hundreds and destroyed millions of dollars of property to help Obama win:
"Purp| 11.8.12 @ 10:35AM
"The Lord rules, not Obama." - CORRECT!
The Lord works in mysterious ways... and this is something for the faithful to contemplate in the way the see the world:
Hurricane Sandy and Chris Christie was the Lord's way of pressing his thumb on the scale to tilt in the direction of President Obama. It was His punishment of Republicans for their lying and trying to cheat (Voter Suppression) their way to political victory, while espousing faith, freedom and constitutional credentials.
Some soul searching of conservative attitudes is in order, for sure."
Why answer this stupid, bigoted moron, just mock and ridicule him with his own words.
Purp| 1.22.13 @ 2:16AM
You are obsessed with me and reprint everything I write.
What does it say about a person that keeps records of another person's writing? Secretly, down deep inside you want to have me, you yearn to be close to me... the more you keep and the more you publish, the more you display your sick attachment to me.
It's okay, I give to the Asylum for the Mentally Ill.
I hope you enjoy the tomes you keep - do you play with them and get yourself off with them?
Why else keep all the crap you keep?
You are not only a LOSER - You are one sick dude.
You need help desperately. Go to the hospital quick. LMFAO ... sick, sick puppy you are.
CJW| 1.22.13 @ 8:19AM
Purpie the Village Idiot
I post what you write to show in your own words what a stupid, racist, mysoginist idiot you are.
So get used to it and live with it.
It is easy, every day you give new material to show your idiocy.
Keep posting, moron.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 1:03PM
Nobody believes you when you claim to have voted for Reagan, Purp, but I didn’t claim that you were too young, I said that to Arnie (it’s tough to keep all those identities straight, isn’t it, Jefferson?).
While there are differences between conservatism and the Republican party, to the extent that you have conflated the two, 30 out of 50 states have Republican governors, many with Republican majority legislatures. The majority in the US House of Representatives is Republican.
While Obama could destroy the whole country first, it remains to be seen if the seeds of a Constitutional revival will prosper in any of these fields. Your claim that “It’s All Over for Reaganism (or conservatism, or anything”) is what leads me to conclude that there is still a chance for all to come back.
TLP| 1.21.13 @ 2:07PM
The Patience of Job.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 8:04PM
Voted for him twice. I don't care what you believe, but there you have it.
As Reagan said about the Democratic Party - "they left me" ... well so did the Republican Party leave me. You are so radical, you can't see any other truth.
If you enjoy losing, enjoy away... it's your destiny.
You're House of RapeResentatives is caving in to the President and will continue to do so. They don't give a crap about your principles, only their own jobs.
Governors will follow - you'll see.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 8:18PM
You say you don't care what I believe, but you keep saying it over and over, hoping that someone will believe you.
You are a fraud, purp.
The ideas you espouse generally fail in practice, and while some people (some times in an electoral majority) will be fooled for a while, when other people's money runs out, they are usually tossed overboard.
Meanwhile, your lack of credibility on this site continues to grow.
It might be time to resurrect your "Jefferson" identity.
Purp| 1.22.13 @ 2:25AM
Naw, just to counter the inevitable "you're too young" bull that you all resort to when you can't counter the argument at hand.
The failure of Reagan's policies are all around us ... so what you believe is irrelevant. But until you actually see, you won't really understand.
It's okay, you will die one day and will no longer need to worry about it all... sad life you will have being ignorant of it all that you are.
You cannot see YOUR money is being given to those with the most and they have convinced you it's a little old lady or a lazy drug addict or union hourly worker that robs you of your money.
Who else had the money, the power and the will to bombard you with propaganda for 30 years - Grandma, Dopey Druggie, Joe the Plumber? Puhlease ...
Follow the the money - it will always lead you to the culprit ... and Grandma's 1500.00 Social Security check is peanuts. So is Joe's 50,000.00 salary. You need to find the Trillions.
Why not start with those that have hundreds of millions to spend on campaigns? You think they give out of the goodness of their heart?
I'm sure you warm the hearts of the Republicans planning to give what you have left to the rich and powerful .... proceed Republicans.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.22.13 @ 5:32PM
Reagan has not been the President since 1989. Barack Obama has been President since 2009.
It is comical that you try to blame the failure of Obama's policies on George W. Bush, and when that well runs dry, on Reagan.
As I said, you are a fraud at every level-what you post about yourself, and what you post about policy. You are a despicable human being, and an obnoxious and odious presence on this site.
Thank you for all you do to remind us of why the left must be defeated.
GobBluthe| 1.21.13 @ 1:40PM
"they met and decided to have a policy of saying no to everything he did""
That's because everything Obama did in 2009-10 was BAD for the country and the economy.
Eisenhower won only because he was A war hero. Not because of ideology.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 8:05PM
America doesn't agree with you ... so you LOST.
TLP| 1.21.13 @ 9:37AM
By the way.........The Prizes have been handed out at The Noble Savage, you Noble Savage, you.
You Won Arnie's Butt Plug.
TLP| 1.21.13 @ 9:39AM
Not the one he wears. The one he puts in his mouth when Anna's Pimp is finished using it.
Anthony| 1.21.13 @ 9:17AM
Not to worry, by the time Obozo is done with his 2nd term, even the low information voters will be begging for a Reagan.
Problem is, will there still be an America left??
Gary B| 1.21.13 @ 9:37AM
It's gonna' be close...
C. Vernon Crisler | 1.21.13 @ 12:10PM
I don't know Anthony. As stupid as these morons were who put Obama in office, do you really think facts or logic will make any difference to them in the future?
JP| 1.21.13 @ 12:59PM
I think Bertolt Brecht's poem, "The Solution" says it all. Here is the important stanza:
"Stating that the people
Had forfeited the confidence of the government
And could win it back only
By redoubled efforts. Would it not be easier
In that case for the government
To dissolve the people
And elect another?"
Brecht was writing about the recent electoral losses the Communist Party suffered in the 1928 elections in Berlin. Eighty years later, his sentiment holds true for the losing party. And if the Dems lose in 2016, Brecht may just become a prophet
vtwin| 1.21.13 @ 12:39PM
By 2016 Reagan will have been out of office for 28 years but Bush only 16 years. It will be a loooooong time before we see another Republican in the White House.
JP| 1.21.13 @ 12:51PM
Funny, that's what the Dems said about their own chances after the 2004 elections. You people have no sense of history or irony.
TLP| 1.21.13 @ 12:58PM
He has No Sense at all, about anything.
That's why he's better, left Alone.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 10:16AM
The Reagan Era is over. America followed his policies for over 30 years and look where we are?
America is rejecting the "Government is Bad" and "Deficits Don't Matter" and "Profit Above All" policies of the Reagan Era.
The promoters of his policies forgot that when the American people are hurt by the policy - ideology is rejected. Reagan's legacy for all but his nuclear arms policy (which is carried on by Barack Obama) is TRASH, in the dustbin of history, finally.
And, Thank GOD, it's finally over. The Reagan damage is over.
vtwin| 1.21.13 @ 12:00PM
Exactly, rising poverty, a declining middle-class, and debt this is the real legacy of Reagan.
Drunken Sailor| 1.21.13 @ 12:37PM
"rising poverty, a declining middle-class, and debt this is the real legacy of Reagan"
Ummmm, of course you do realize that every one of those things you mentioned have gotten worse under Obama don't you?
TLP| 1.21.13 @ 12:55PM
You're wasting your time.
You might as well try and Teach your Dog to Memorize Homer's - The Iliad.
Drunken Sailor| 1.21.13 @ 2:02PM
You meant I wasted all those hours? He can read it, he just can't explain it to me.
TLP| 1.21.13 @ 2:08PM
Have you tried asking him in Greek?
Drunken Sailor| 1.21.13 @ 3:05PM
Naw, he's straight.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 8:07PM
He had to FIX Bush's destruction first ... how long does it take to reverse 8 years of Bush and 3o years of Reagan Policies? Hmmmm....
America is smarter than you apparently.
C. Vernon Crisler | 1.21.13 @ 12:12PM
Porpoise, do you just get up in the mornings and decide to be stupid? Or do you have to do some warm-up exercises first?
TLP| 1.21.13 @ 12:56PM
He warms up by reading Arnie's and vtwin's scribblings.
Warrior| 1.21.13 @ 4:35PM
My liberal friends(???) make a great point. Now that we can trace back the bad things about the US to Reagan, why stop there. George Washington and the boys got us involved in war, ran debt, personally gave handouts to blacks. Let's move even further, King George is to blame for all this. Oh why not, that son of a bitch Christopher Columbus...cavemen and Godzilla...the Big Bang!! At least they stopped blaming Bush for a day. Thankfully, the Marxist is now in a position to fix it all.
C. Vernon Crisler | 1.21.13 @ 7:09PM
Sad, but true. We'll definitely get fixed.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 8:08PM
We all knew you weren't proud of the Founding Fathers ... and you have just admitted it. Thank You.
how long does it take to reverse 8 years of Bush and 3o years of Reagan Policies? Hmmmm....
America is smarter than you apparently.
Warrior| 1.21.13 @ 8:42PM
We? To answer your question, 6 years. All the job gains and economic certainty disappeared the day Pelosi became Speaker. Just look at any economic indicator or unemployment chart for confirmation. I don't suppose you would be willing to provide statistical proof to the contrary?
Of course you won't. Return to spreading peanut butter on Oedipally produced reproductive Tic Tac and let your mongoloid poodle go to town.
Purp| 1.22.13 @ 2:32AM
What you point to is the beginning of the economic collapse. Pelosi didn't take over until January 2007 and the collapse began before she could do anything.
You do know that nothing, nothing can be made law without the President's signature, don't you?
... and THAT was Bush for 8 years, pal. Bush is to blame pure and simple. He had to sign everything, and stopped plenty that the Democratic House and Senate tried to pass before Obama took over.
But Bush had Republican control of Congress for 6 years and they helped him create the mess he handed to Obama.
They were all for business, deregulation and profit... only the profits went to the few and screwed the many.
History shall not be kind to the Republicans. First, Goldwater, then Nixon and finally Bush II. Quite a bunch of f'ups.
Warrior| 1.22.13 @ 12:09PM
Broken record. I asked for the statistics, but of course you take the strawman argument. What exactly did Bush stop? What was deregulated? What policies were implemented that allowed businesses to screw the many? I know you can't answer. If there was a 2nd Revolution, you wouldn't last 10 minutes.
GobBluthe| 1.21.13 @ 1:43PM
We did pretty well from 1983-2000. I think you cant blame Reagan for the Tech or Housing Bubbles than ultimately collapsed. Under Reagan and Clinton for that matter we had sound money practices, strong growth, strong job creation, rising standard of living and rising incomes.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 8:10PM
You don't know history very well do you?
Did you know that Reagan made the recession he inherited from Carter worse?
That is until he spent money and ran up deficits... Then he caught deficititis and we all got infected.
CJW| 1.21.13 @ 2:57PM
Purparnie the Village Idiot
Explain to us again how a 20% tax rate cut will take those paying 0% to an 8% rate.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 8:10PM
Hint: Broaden the base ... you figure it out.
CJW| 1.21.13 @ 9:59PM
Purpie the Village Idiot:
We did this before, moron, and you are still too stupid to understand. Read your own words, idiot:
CJW| 8.10.12 @ 8:05PM
Purpie
You need to calm down, purpie and admit you made a mistake and do not understand the tax rates and economics.
You just cannot accept facts, and continue to lie, so in your own words:
Purp| 8.9.12 @ 2:13PM
Did you pass Math in school?
If I pay no income tax today, but by Romney's plan, 10% goes to 8%, but I pay nothing today - how do I not pay 8% more than I do today?
8% Romney - 0% today = 8% tax on my income, whatever it is.
Reply to this
CJW| 8.9.12 @ 4:02PM
Listen slowly idiot, 10% goes to 8% only if you area at 10%.
If you are at 0%, like you because you are too stupid to work, then you remain at 0% . You do not go to 8%
I am going to save this for a purpie screen shot. You actually believe that your rate goes from 0 to 8 because there is a reduction from 10 to 8.
I feel sorry for you. You are too stupid to laugh at.
Purp| 1.22.13 @ 2:37AM
You really believe the crap you write?
You left out .. "if everyone pays 8% under Romney" please explain how if I pay o % tax today, I don't end up paying more, 8% in this case under Romney?
When you answer the question "What does broadening the tax base mean" ? for yourself , perhaps then you can stop your incessant whining, since you clearly don't understand what Romney meant.
America did, and that's why you lost.
CJW| 1.22.13 @ 8:20AM
Purpie the Village Idiot
I post what you write to show in your own words what a stupid, racist, mysoginist idiot you are.
So get used to it and live with it.
It is easy, every day you give new material to show your idiocy.
Keep posting, moron.
CJW| 1.22.13 @ 8:21AM
Purpie the Village Idiot
Read your own words, moron.
Losing it, purpie?
squalis| 1.21.13 @ 10:17AM
I skimmed throught the article, so perhaps I missed the obvious (at least to me) explanation of the contradiction. Perhaps many of those who self identify as a conservative do not correctly understand what the current political definition of conservatism means. Do the pollsters provide definitions of liberalism or conservatism when asking the question? Given our low info voter population, that seems plausible, doesn't it?
PolishKnight| 1.21.13 @ 10:27AM
The author, like many of the commenters, are halfway there. They see the Reagan era is over, but don't know fully why. The see the that there are more self-identified conservatives than liberals, but Obama wins elections. I'll piece together the puzzle for you:
The majority of Obama's voters cast ballots for him due to race and gender entitlements, cronyism, or welfare benefits. They simply don't care about ideology. They want an "Obamaphone" and don't care where it comes from. Get it?
The "raise everyone's boats" thinking of RR won't work on such people because in their view, the Democrats offer them a VIP seat. Entitlements above the general population (especially middle and working class white males). That means a lot to them.
By the same token, the Republican party and even conservatives do little for their base electorate. While the left hands out racial and gender preferences for government jobs, education, and contracting positions the right frets about trying to poach votes from La Raza and outsource to China. Romney didn't do anything about it. And he lost.
Not only is the era of Reagan over, ladies and gentlemen, but also the era of Marxist ideals. It's all about race and gender entitlements. The left sneers about it when they win and pray to their Marxist god that you don't figure it out.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 11:04AM
"The majority of Obama's voters cast ballots for him due to race and gender entitlements, cronyism, or welfare benefits. " - that's why you lose.
Anyone here echoes of "47%" in PK's statements?
As far as the "The "raise everyone's boats" thinking of RR" - we are sinking in the boats he provided ... his policies sunk the middle class and enriched the wealthy. The facts are clear and America knows now. That's why the Reagan Era is over - it stunk, it failed.
Oh, and there is no "Marxist God" - just Americans wanting jobs, security and a future for themselves and their children. Republicans don't give them that and Democrats do. Third reason you lose.
Ideology is a losing proposition and it always is except for the fringe on both sides - Fourth reason you lose.
Keep it up - you're doing fine.
JD| 1.21.13 @ 12:16PM
By real wealth measures, poorer people have advanced faster than richer people over the past 30 years. That is why the Democrats work hard to avoid honest measures.
Instead of tracking the fates of people, they measure only pre-tax incomes, by households, by percentiles. Thus they bask in the following three fallacies:
1. Pre-tax incomes do not reflect inflation properly, do not reflect disparate tax burdens, do not reflect changing costs, do not reflect changing amounts of work, and do no reflect the disparate value of welfare state benefits.
2. Household incomes do not reflect the changing composition of households, including disparities in number of workers per household.
3. Tracking by percentiles ignores class mobility, assuming that the same people comprise each bracket year after year.
Democrats make no attempt to explain their use of measures with these flaws. They make no effort to suggest that these flaws are too insignificant to account for (they are in fact too significant to ignore).
They simply try to hide the truth from the electorate by repeating their "Big Lies" loudly and frequently, using the say-so of other Leftists as their rationale. Anyone who dares point out their lies is lambasted for "revising history" and denying "widely known facts".
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 8:14PM
I haven't read anything quite so stupid in a long, long time.
Are you better off now than 30 years ago? Or ask your parents, if you're too young.
Pre-tax income is what your wages are, and they are adjusted for inflation.
Do you seriously think the researchers and economists that track these numbers don't know how to adjust for what you mentioned? Seriously?
Forget economists, forget numbers - just go ask your parents.
Ask your neighbors...
Read what CEOs make today
OMG you are oblivious.
CJW| 1.21.13 @ 10:01PM
Purpie the Village Idiot
If you want to read something really stupid read your explanation above how you go from 0% to 8% tax rate.
You have no shame to keep posting such idiocy.
Purp| 1.22.13 @ 2:37AM
You are obsessed with me and reprint everything I write.
What does it say about a person that keeps records of another person's writing? Secretly, down deep inside you want to have me, you yearn to be close to me... the more you keep and the more you publish, the more you display your sick attachment to me.
It's okay, I give to the Asylum for the Mentally Ill.
I hope you enjoy the tomes you keep - do you play with them and get yourself off with them?
Why else keep all the crap you keep?
You are not only a LOSER - You are one sick dude.
You need help desperately. Go to the hospital quick. LMFAO ... sick, sick puppy you are.
CJW| 1.22.13 @ 8:22AM
Purpie the Village Idiot
I post what you write to show in your own words what a stupid, racist, mysoginist idiot you are.
So get used to it and live with it.
It is easy, every day you give new material to show your idiocy.
Keep posting, moron.
Drunken Sailor| 1.21.13 @ 12:40PM
Of course you do realize that the "Rising tide, lifts all boats" comment comes originally from one of the left's favorites, JFK, don't you?
Amazing how the left thinks lowering taxes worked for JFK but not for any Republican that has done the same. Then again the blame Bush for increasing the deficit with tax cuts, yet praise Obama for keeping the same tax cuts.
Makes you head spin doesn't it?
JD| 1.21.13 @ 2:47PM
Democrats who think Kennedy was a good president think that because he was a "Democrat". They have no idea what he did while in office.
Drunken Sailor| 1.21.13 @ 3:05PM
Point taken.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 8:17PM
Actually no it doesn't. Didn't YOU know THAT?
"In his memoir Counselor: A Life At The Edge Of History, Kennedy's speechwriter Ted Sorensen reveals that the phrase was not one of his or the president’s own fashioning. It was in his first year working for Kennedy (during JFK’s tenure in the Senate), when Mr. Sorensen was trying to tackle economic problems in New England, that he happened upon the phrase. He writes that he noticed that “the regional chamber of commerce, the New England Council, had a thoughtful slogan: ‘A rising tide lifts all the boats.’” From then on, JFK would borrow the slogan often. Sorensen highlights this as an example of quotes mistakenly attributed to President Kennedy"
No problem... take away tax cuts - what else you Conservadums got for America?
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 8:19PM
Oh, you do have something - Rape is wonderful and should be legal - unless it's not LEGITIMATE RAPE. Just raise that baby that reminds you of that blot on your life woman... you know you enjoyed it.
Yeah, you got that for America, huh?
JP| 1.21.13 @ 12:54PM
No, the Progressives gave up on Marx about 110 years ago. Marx was passee. The late comedian George Carlin said it best, "When Fascism comes to America it will come wearing a "Smiley Face".
Obama's shit eating grin says it all.
PolishKnight| 1.21.13 @ 2:16PM
Purp, even as the left went hysterical over Romney's unofficial remarks, what he said was nonetheless pretty true. But it's not just welfare but also race and gender entitlements that keep the Democrats going. The problem with Romney is that he isn't willing to do anything significant about either of them which is why his base didn't show up.
Of course, the Obama Era isn't much better but you simply don't care since you're a Troll cheerleader for the left as I pointed out before.
Before you dance upon the grave of the right, keep in mind that the left went through a restructuring 50 years ago. They were facing their cherished Jim Crow and Socialist party becoming irrelevant as the working and middle class in the USA rejected both. So they reversed Jim Crow and threw their working class white electorate under the bus and even transformed from a Marxist party into a corporate fascist party (GE, Goldman Sachs, etc.)
So the question isn't whether the Republicans will die and America will become a one party state. It won't. The question is how Republicans will reform themselves and this will leave the Democrats holding the bag of their own "tea partiers" (the Obamas and welfare class.) The left went hysterical over that accusation and Obama letting welfare moms off the hook. Because they know that most voters don't support them on that. And you know it.
Sweet dreams.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 8:21PM
Oh, my dreams are soooo sweet since Nov 6th ... yep they are. Too bad yours aren't.
I agree with you ... you need to restructure for the next 30 years ... I won't care after that. So have a good time.
PolishKnight| 1.22.13 @ 10:29AM
Yet, Purp, not so many people showed up to cheer The One at his inauguration. Apparently, it's rather bittersweet for the party faithful as well.
So sure, you get your victory along with 3 and a half dollar gasoline and economic stagnation. In the meantime, the Democrat party is not achieving or even moving in the direction of Sweden. Ironically, as I said, if the Republican party does necessary retooling, they will have more in common with Sweden than the American left. And you know it.
Purp, you're the John McCain supporters of the left. You cheer on winning elections, at all costs, even when there is no benefit to the nation or your proclaimed ideology. It's working, for now, because the people voting for the party are pushing it over the top but these are people you don't care to hang out with. Heck, you're here, right? Move to Detroit and enjoy paradise! Hehehe.
Pecos Pete| 1.21.13 @ 10:42AM
Welcome to King O's era ... the land of more people on food stamps, more people in poverty, more people unemployed, more people on welfare, more money to corrupt politicians, more money to democrat millionaires/billionaires and more money to big business.
And then there is more national debt, more debt than can be repayed in the next 100 years, if ever.
King O's next four years will be one crises after another all designed to Balkanize the USA and to try to cement Marxist policy as the governing philosophy of the federal government.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 11:06AM
"the land of more people on food stamps, more people in poverty, more people unemployed, more people on welfare, more money to corrupt politicians, more money to democrat millionaires/billionaires and more money to big business." - all a result of the last 30 years of Reagan policies. Until you realize that, you will still continue to lose. And lose BIG.
Please continue Republicans....
JD| 1.21.13 @ 12:09PM
Purp just laid out all of the evidence that has ever existed for his claims: the say-so of America's Leftists.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 8:22PM
Taught to America the hard way - through Republican policies since Reagan.
PolishKnight| 1.22.13 @ 10:32AM
Clinton pumped money into liar loans as part of his non-white male loan program. Banks were told, even ordered, or make them. Then the housing bubble collapsed. So the secret to Clinton's economy was to live on credit, enjoy the dot.com boom, and sign off on Republican welfare reform policies.
One thing is for sure, Purp, you don't expect "change" from Obama except new ways to blame Republicans for all the problems in the world. That's your paradise. It's a rather bleak one.
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 10:50AM
Guys, how about this. I'm a far lefty, and there are probably many things that we'll never agree on. But I can tell you, that liberals cherish civil liberties, and the fact that the national security state ever since Truman has expanded exponentially, and consumes a huge part of our budget.
So how about all of liberty and freedom loving people, admit that the Patriot Act and all it's associated policies be repealed. This problem really got bad under W, but I admit, most of them have stayed in place under Obama.
So support lefty websites, and yes, even the ACLU for challenging these ridiculous laws in the name of national security. The fact that phone calls, and emails can be tracked and access, that all your electronic transactions can be tracked and accessed is horrible.
The US should not be a police state, but it has been for sometime. There should be a joint effort of the left and right nationally to get all that stuff repealed.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 11:08AM
You proceed from a false assumption that conservatives don't want a police state.
Conservatives are okay with a police state - as long as they are in charge. They resort to guns ONLY when they are not in charge.
JD| 1.21.13 @ 12:04PM
We allow Leftists to define themselves by what they say and do, then analyze and judge them for it.
Leftists like Purp, by contrast, can stand nothing less than to allow us to define ourselves. That is why they devote themselves to making up fake positions for us, then condemning us for supposedly holding these positions.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 8:27PM
You and your House of RapeResentatives have defined you all too well.
1) Who said "Legitimate Rape" - a lefty?
2) Who said "47%" - a lefty?
3) Who said "30% of Americans are takers" - a lefty?
Stumped? Here, let me make it easy for you:
1. Republican Congressman Todd Aiken
2. Republican Presidential Nominee Mitt Romney
3. Republican VP Nominee Paul Ryan
Yeah, those are all Lefty fantasies aren't they? You forgot one thing - THEY ARE ALL ON VIDEOTAPE!
LMFAO ... OMG ...stop it, my side hurts. Never laughed so hard in my life.
JP| 1.21.13 @ 12:50PM
All Progressives have dreamt of a Police State since Richard Ely's Social Gospel dissertation. A police state doesn't have to be a jackbooted, goose-stepping thugocracy. Look at the UK, which now mandates in-home webcams for all people on the public dole. Big Brother wants to know if you're eating right, not smoking, and if you're children are getting enough sleep and study time. The UK is about a generation ahead of us. But Obama is determined to catch-up quickly. Don't think these federal freebies will not come without strings. One of the hidden things about ObamaCare is the power HHS will have over us. At some point in time a bureaucrat in HHS will determine that fatties, smokers, and boozers are costing the taxpayers too much. Free ObamaCare will eventually evolve into federally run fitness centers (and lord help the lard-butt who refuses to attend), as well as clinics for smoking and drinking cessation. Overweight toddlers will be reported to HHS agents by their pediatricians, and parents will be fined or have their children taken away. Federal controls will regulate and ration online activities (including TV viewing), and "non-conformist" behavior (ie political dissent, gun ownership, even jokes will be treated with federally subsidized Meds (The Russians have a huge head start on behavior modification through pharmecueticals. But Obama is a fast learner.).
This is our Brave New World
PolishKnight| 1.21.13 @ 2:26PM
The socialist left has murdered more people in the 20th century than all of history put together: Josef Stalin, the red Chinese, Vietnam, N Korea, etc.
Even Hitler could be classified a leftist as a big government socialist. National Socialism.
In addition, the left has engaged in pruditry (sexual harassment laws) that would make a Puritan wince. Then Bill Clinton got caught and they tried to cut him a pass.
What about the left _isn't_ a hypocritical, raw grab for power?
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 8:28PM
Too bad for you Absolute Monarchy is dead. You hold the title there.
PolishKnight| 1.22.13 @ 10:30AM
Purp, now you're babbling. Try to be a good troll, won't you?
PolishKnight| 1.21.13 @ 2:26PM
The socialist left has murdered more people in the 20th century than all of history put together: Josef Stalin, the red Chinese, Vietnam, N Korea, etc.
Even Hitler could be classified a leftist as a big government socialist. National Socialism.
In addition, the left has engaged in pruditry (sexual harassment laws) that would make a Puritan wince. Then Bill Clinton got caught and they tried to cut him a pass.
What about the left _isn't_ a hypocritical, raw grab for power?
C. Vernon Crisler | 1.21.13 @ 7:25PM
The Patriot Act was designed to protect us from terrorists. What would you put in its place? Would you provide Ron Paul pamphlets to interested terrorists?
Petronius| 1.21.13 @ 11:38AM
Voting patterns are a trailing indicator. All voters are uninformed to the extent that they know what they see in those horrid adds and sound bites. They have no idea what any candidate's intentions are after being sworn in. Reagan made a deal with the devil in the form of Tip O'Neill. The budget fights weren't much of a fight. Congress gave way on the deficit spending for defense so long as they had a blank check on the social side after the perfunctory veto override and they still met on the first tee each Friday morning to cut up the spoils. Republicans do not understand that most voters are purely emotional and reactive. Liberals are masterful at harnessing emotion and leaving logic and reason as detritus to their onslaught. This will continue until the economy crashes and their polity will then be trumped by survival in the purest sense. When we are all back in the jungle, they will die first and fast. It's the only way Liberals can ever be forced to grow up since their Government is Their support group. Yesterday at my club I was told that Texas has a proposition for Secession on their spring ballot. If that is what it takes to make the beltway parasites keep their hands to themselves, so mote it be.
JD| 1.21.13 @ 12:08PM
Reagan was not the victory some conservatives think he was. Even before he left office, the Left was adapting to his new model in ways that have caused great harm ever since. They learned that to win, they have to lie. Deceiving voters became the new core of their agenda.
They began moving the country left more through regulatory agencies than through legislation. They began converting welfare into "tax credits". They began redefining words to turn good ideas into "evil" and give the veneer of conservatism to what is actually very left-wing. They began setting far-left baselines for projections, such that anything to the right of far-left could be publicly defined as "far-right".
The point of all of this was to trick the public into thinking that Leftism had the merits of the Right. Thus people would vote for Leftism, then blame the Right for its failures. This has worked spectacularly.
JP| 1.21.13 @ 12:36PM
Reagan slowed pace of Progressivism for a time. One need look no closer than the number of federal regulations that were reduced during his tenure. Granted, Carter did begin it with deregulating airlines, but Reagan reduced the number of regulations by over 10,000 pages. For perhaps 5 years he became the bane of the federal employees (believe it or not, the Betlway was in a kind of economic and emotional depression during his 8 years).
During the 1970s, federal regulators seemed to be everywhere. The DOJ was busy suing power plants, clothes makers, and automakers. Federal regulators sued the State of Tennesse because it didn't mandate male cheerleaders for its girls high school sports. Ditto for Iowa, whose girls basketball program used only a 6 player half court game (which the DOJ considered unconstitutional).
The Reagan Era ended when the Bush's took over. Long Live Progressives.
Michele San Pietro| 1.21.13 @ 12:32PM
No, the Reagan era isn't finished and millions of Reaganites, in America and all over the world, will demonstrate it!
Jack London| 1.21.13 @ 1:01PM
The reason that the Reagan era is over is that finally a majority of Americans are not voting against their interests, as they have been tricked into doing for so long.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 1:17PM
"The reason that the Reagan era is over is that finally a majority of Americans are not voting against their interests, as they have been tricked into doing for so long."
The reason that the Reagan era is over is that finally a majority of Americans are
notnow votingagainstfor theirinterestsfree stuff, as theyhave been tricked into doinghad the foresight not to do for so long.I fixed it for you Jack, though even the way you said it, you sound like Romney, as long as you equate their interests with government handouts.
Jack London| 1.21.13 @ 1:50PM
You lost the '47%' argument at the election Albert. Go look at who they are, how 'generous' our welfare system is, and whether it's best to help them by giving even more to the 1%.
JD| 1.21.13 @ 2:02PM
There are no fragments of truth to latch onto when countering Jack's posts. There is no "giving" to the 1%.
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 2:03PM
Jack,
Albert's an idiot. That's all you need to know.
He's a partisan hack that can't distinguish between Republican propaganda and reality.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 2:10PM
Gee, Arnie, does this mean you don't think it's a good discussion anymore?
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 2:24PM
It's always an excellent discussion with a retard like you Albert. You are so insightful with your full blown stupidity.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 6:43PM
Idiot. Retard. Stupid (or stoo-pid).Girls.
That's the best you can do?
Could you throw in ugly?
You've got to get a grip on your Hate, Arnie, it accentuates your childishness.
I say that you're immature, and you prove it.
Just like when I say that you're wrong.
Arnie| 1.22.13 @ 3:02AM
I am simply addressing children, like you Albert. So I have to write down to your level.
Seriously, you have never name called on this website? Shall I dig up the multiple examples or not?
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.22.13 @ 5:41PM
Dig it up, Arnie. I've called you odious. I call you a fraud, immature and childish, because you are, and you prove the point each time you post
Prove my point.
Do your research, and post where my description of you varies from childish, immature and incorrect.
Show some courage, too, and post the examples of you being childish, immature and incorrect.
It won't be hard to find.
TLP| 1.21.13 @ 2:13PM
Ya see that, Albert?
You're an Idiot.
You're a Partisan Hack, who can't distinguish between Republican Propaganda, and Reality.
So says Anna from Emory U's little boy, Arnie.
You can't make this sh*t up.
Arnie| 1.21.13 @ 2:27PM
TLP, "The Limp Penis" and his little boyfriend Albert. This is so cute. Seriously, you guys should move in with each other.
Again TLP, lay off the Viagra. You're coming on to old men now.
CJW| 1.21.13 @ 3:23PM
Purparnie the Village Idiot
So in addition to being a racist, now your prove yourself a homophobe since you believe that is an insult.
Purp| 1.22.13 @ 2:38AM
You are obsessed with me and reprint everything I write.
What does it say about a person that keeps records of another person's writing? Secretly, down deep inside you want to have me, you yearn to be close to me... the more you keep and the more you publish, the more you display your sick attachment to me.
It's okay, I give to the Asylum for the Mentally Ill.
I hope you enjoy the tomes you keep - do you play with them and get yourself off with them?
Why else keep all the crap you keep?
You are not only a LOSER - You are one sick dude.
You need help desperately. Go to the hospital quick. LMFAO ... sick, sick puppy you are.
CJW| 1.21.13 @ 3:28PM
Purp the Village Idiot
Now purpie descends into racism:
"Oh, and YOU'RE a LOSER ... can't even beat the black man... you're so awful... hahahaha (that's for your last line, you wanna dish it out, then take it)"
Can't even beat the "black man?" So you believe blacks are inferior and easy to beat.
Keep posting moron, you provide fresh material every day.
You are truly an idiot and a racist
Purp| 1.22.13 @ 2:37AM
You are obsessed with me and reprint everything I write.
What does it say about a person that keeps records of another person's writing? Secretly, down deep inside you want to have me, you yearn to be close to me... the more you keep and the more you publish, the more you display your sick attachment to me.
It's okay, I give to the Asylum for the Mentally Ill.
I hope you enjoy the tomes you keep - do you play with them and get yourself off with them?
Why else keep all the crap you keep?
You are not only a LOSER - You are one sick dude.
You need help desperately. Go to the hospital quick. LMFAO ... sick, sick puppy you are.
CJW| 1.22.13 @ 8:22AM
Purpie the Village Idiot
I post what you write to show in your own words what a stupid, racist, mysoginist idiot you are.
So get used to it and live with it.
It is easy, every day you give new material to show your idiocy.
Keep posting, moron.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 2:11PM
You have it backwards, Jack. Taxes are a "taking", not a giving.
TLP| 1.21.13 @ 2:15PM
What a surprise.
A Stupid Brit.
CJW| 1.21.13 @ 2:24PM
Albert
Good job, but talking to purparnie is a waste of time.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 2:36PM
Yes, but it is a holiday, so I thought I'd take one (or two) for the team, and tie them up here for a while today.
CJW| 1.21.13 @ 3:32PM
Is Soros funding this little exercise by Anna?
I see that by patiently stating the facts and logic, Anna's crew gets exasperated and resorts to foul language and insults.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 4:12PM
Exactly. If you can't convince with meaningless links and cut and paste, try imaginary gay bashing.
Of course, Arnie is even more obnoxious than Purp, as he tries to sneak his own play by play commentary in, making an even bigger fool of himself.
JD| 1.21.13 @ 2:02PM
The Reagan era is indeed over, but you will have to continue to use dishonest measures to convince Americans that that's working well for them.
Michele San Pietro| 1.22.13 @ 8:42AM
I totally disagree, if there was a President who had the Americans' interests at heart, this was Ronald Reagan.
PolishKnight| 1.21.13 @ 2:33PM
All this talk about Reagan got me thinking: The man had honorable roots in the pro-worker Democrat party back when it wasn't about just welfare mothers, bureaucrats and reverse Jim Crow.
The Democrat party was dying post WWII and radically transformed away from Reagan as they sought to survive at all costs and retain their core big government agenda. The right will need to do the same and transform while retaining a pro-entrepreneurial spirit, true recognition of individual rights, and a respect for traditions and customs that work.
Being a heterosexual, white male isn't such a bad thing. Most of Western Europe that the left idolizes is made up of them after all. In addition, we are the hope of a manufacturing base after China refuses to ship stuff on credit from their slave girl factories. We are the future whether many people realize it today or not. Two parent, straight families are still the best hope of children to grow up without becoming gang bangers.
But this is going to mean that the Republicans will need to take on some tough issues along with holding their elite's feet to the fire. The left has gotten to enjoy it both ways with their elite (George Soros) getting low tax rates for some time now. The left's bluffs need to be called along with their bankrupt ideology.
SC| 1.21.13 @ 3:07PM
"January 20, Sunday — God’s day."
Hmmmmm...-what about American citizens whose religion uses ANOTHER day as their Sabbath...?
A small point--to the people on THIS site-- but ONE of MANY reasons y'all should be on your own planet--if you're not already there..!!
JD| 1.21.13 @ 4:39PM
Leftists demand incredible "tolerance" from others while practicing none whatsoever themselves. If this particular Leftist himself thought that Sunday was God's day, not only would he NOT be complaining that someone else referred to it as such, but he would be very angry if anyone else registered said complaint.
SC| 1.21.13 @ 5:13PM
That was such a ridiculously lame response--even from these quarters.
I'm not even sure how the writer of such pap could possibly take it seriously
cicero| 1.21.13 @ 3:22PM
The Dem Party is all about staying in power. Say anything, do anything, promise anything. The electorate is getting less educated all the time. With all of the emphasis in the public schools about testing for reading and math, we have generated two generations of citizen who do not read, and cannot do simple math. (How do you earn $10.00 and feel free to spend $1000,000.00?) We have stopped teachiing history, and that which is taught is bogus. We have stopped teaching classical liturature, and substituted it with fantasy. What did we expect.? We now have an electorate where you can fool all of the voters all of the time.
As I said, the Dems are all about staying in power at all costs. The end result for the country is of no concern to them. How else do you explain Pelosi, Reid, Dingle (I just threw him in for fun. They run a senile old man, and prop him up at photo ops. And he wins elections on his name alone.). The voting public has been so dumbed down that they vote for candidates who pormise them stuff, and who they think "care" about them How dumb can they get? We shall see.
Miles Glorious| 1.21.13 @ 3:52PM
There is a terrible day of retribution coming, Vae victis.
Jack London| 1.21.13 @ 3:24PM
For the more open-minded of you I suggest you read Stiglitz's article on inequality in NYT:
There are four major reasons inequality is squelching our recovery. The most immediate is that our middle class is too weak to support the consumer spending that has historically driven our economic growth. While the top 1 percent of income earners took home 93 percent of the growth in incomes in 2010, the households in the middle — who are most likely to spend their incomes rather than save them and who are, in a sense, the true job creators — have lower household incomes, adjusted for inflation, than they did in 1996.
Second, the hollowing out of the middle class since the 1970s, a phenomenon interrupted only briefly in the 1990s, means that they are unable to invest in their future, by educating themselves and their children and by starting or improving businesses.
Third, the weakness of the middle class is holding back tax receipts, especially because those at the top are so adroit in avoiding taxes and in getting Washington to give them tax breaks.
Fourth, inequality is associated with more frequent and more severe boom-and-bust cycles that make our economy more volatile and vulnerable.
http://opinionator.blogs.nytim.....covery/?hp
JD| 1.21.13 @ 4:45PM
Spending does not drive economies. Production does. You have never attempted to address my past arguments on this point, so I won't waste time restating them.
The middle class is not nearly so weak as you make it sound. Your measures are dishonest, and deliberately so. You measure pre-tax income, thus hiding the disparate effects of taxation and social redistribution from the measure. Changes in costs and quality of products are also ignored, and you measure income brackets, not individuals, in order to create the illusion of static classes. The simply reality is that if you trace any sizeable group of Americans over time, those in the lower and middle classes see their incomes increase while the rich see slight decline. But these changes cause them to change buckets in your bracket scheme, so you miss that.
As for what problems do plague America's less productive, they are consequences of Leftism or foreign changes. While the internet and other technologies enabled Globalization, China renounced communism, India stopped trying to practice communism without the name, and America kept making it more expensive to do business here. Offshoring is the inevitable consequence.
As for disparate taxation, "loopholes", and the like, they are the lifeblood of the party that lives to micromanage the economy, particularly through the tax code. You own every aspect of that problem.
Jack London| 1.21.13 @ 5:23PM
Much as I admire your continual faith in your right wing creed - it takes real determination to post so much nonsense for so long - I'm afraid I'll have to defer to the Nobel prize winner.
JD| 1.21.13 @ 5:50PM
As I said above, liberals' evidence for their beliefs is always the say-so of other liberals.
JD| 1.21.13 @ 4:47PM
As always, Jack, you can only argue from the presumption that everyone else believes your party's ludicrous narratives.
You never actually support a point. You start from the presumption that the point has already been irrefutably made. Your "argument", then, consists solely of bashing people who don't agree with the conclusions that would follow if your point were actually true.
And you seem utterly incapable of even realizing that you do this.
John Navratil| 1.21.13 @ 6:32PM
JD,
It's never the fact or logical deductions made from them. It's the technical points - playing rope-a-dope to let you punch yourself out. Make three points and the counter-punch will be the one they see easiest to attack - the others are ignored. Eventually you will misplace a comma and victory will be claimed as a TKO. Tedious really!
Nevertheless, the inanities often get the better of me.
These trolls are really best left alone. The scroll wheel is a useful tool. If you must play, resist the temptation to think you will persuade them through argument. Thinking isn't part of the joust.
C. Vernon Crisler | 1.21.13 @ 7:33PM
"squelching our recovery"
Well, at least our resident leftwing loons admit something is wrong. I continue to play my violin: you deserve what you vote for.
Petronius| 1.21.13 @ 5:44PM
With all posted here it can be said that the Liberals believe they can cure Lincoln's Disease; "too many pigs for the tits."
Would that the Federal Sow be put out of Our misery.
Kingofthenet| 1.21.13 @ 6:43PM
If your Staving, dumb from lack of a good education and sick from lack of Health Care, FREEDOM doesn't mean anything. The Untouchables in Indian or most Pakistanis are REALLY free, they don't pay any taxes, the Govt. does NOTHING for them, is that how you want this country to be?
Miles Glorious| 1.21.13 @ 7:39PM
You are right,we should all hope to be like Camden,NJ.
Purp| 1.21.13 @ 8:30PM
Naw, let's all be Texas ... just about as good a life as Camden.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 1.21.13 @ 8:30PM
“If your Staving, dumb from lack of a good education and sick from lack of Health Care, FREEDOM doesn't mean anything.”
Speaking of “dumb from lack of a good education”, I think the public schools of New Jersey owe the taxpayers a refund for your majesty. I might have spelled it ”you’re starving”, and thought that people got sick from pathogens such as disease and viruses (or as a result of the application of blunt force trauma, thermal blast, etc.), not from “Lack of Health Care”.
I’m sure Cuba would love to have you, with their free education, free healthcare, and lack of freedom.
nathan| 1.21.13 @ 9:41PM
Folks I know this is a total waste of time at this point but I'll try again. Since the New Deal there have been five republican presidents. Since the Great Society programs there have been effectively 4, Nixon, Reagan, both Bushes. That means that since 52 we've had over 30 years of republican rule. A few years of republican control of the house, a few of the senate. Ike was an avowed liberal domestically albeit a total neocon abroad. But the rest?
Now with that as prologue, again, ONE MORE TIME name one, just one, really just one New Deal/Great Society program eliminated/meaningfully reduced by these presidents or congresses or combinations thereof. Just one. ONE. In all too many cases like Plan D they were enlarged dramatically. Were the soviets a huge threat? Yes. OBL and his friends/partners? Yes but less so than most people believe. (Bush grossly over reacted.) But the real threat, what was absolutely positively going to destroy the country were those entitlement programs and no republican did anything to really deal with them. Not Nixon, not St. Ronald not anyone. If I'm wrong, prove it. I honestly would be delighted if someone could. Name a program that was part of the orginal GS in 1964 that RR killed in 8 years.
Now folks sorry it's just plain too late. I'm sorry it is. In the end winning abroad means nothing if we lose at home and that's basically what folks like RR and Nixon and Bush and others just really didn't get.
Arnie| 1.22.13 @ 5:03AM
"Clinton’s affirmation was also affirmation of the continuation of the Reagan era.
And then came Barack Obama."
Interesting. Mr. Kengor forgot to mention the W years and his huge expansion of the national security apparatus.
Ralph Novy| 1.22.13 @ 10:08PM
I think it's pretty damned appalling that so many Americans would think Reagan a "great" president.
No, he wasn't the demon that some on the left think, but neither was he the pro-democracy statesman and "personal responsibility" advocate that right and center-right people think.
He did not severely slash taxes. He did not significantly shrink government. What he did do was unleash the ethos of corporate America -- rather unqualified "financial success" -- upon all the rest of us.
I'll give him SOME credit for actually believing that would be a relatively "beneficent" thing .....
But he was wrong! He had merely succumbed to or been beguiled by age-old "noblesse oblige" thinking. Ultimately and eminently hierarchical and condescending. And dishonest.